• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

National Bus Company Privatisation: Did the NBC Board ask to be privatised without being broken up?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Titfield

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2013
Messages
1,665
Does ahyone know / can anyone point me in the right direction?

I have it at the back of my mind that the Board of NBC asked the govt if NBC could be privarised en bloc and not sold off as 70 odd operating units.

Cant find any reference to this online so help please?

As a follow up where can I find the names of the NBC Charman and Board at this time?

Thanks In Advance
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,965
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
Does ahyone know / can anyone point me in the right direction?

I have it at the back of my mind that the Board of NBC asked the govt if NBC could be privarised en bloc and not sold off as 70 odd operating units.

Cant find any reference to this online so help please?

As a follow up where can I find the names of the NBC Charman and Board at this time?

Thanks In Advance

Robert Brook was Chief Exec til 1986 and then Rodney Lund til 1988.
 

Statto

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2011
Messages
3,208
Location
At home or at the pub
NBC did ask to be sold off as one company but someone said to the minister in charge of the sell off, that they'd be able to wave off any competition by another operator positioning buses from other depots amongst other things, & that was like a red light to a bull, so the company ended up being broken up.
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,965
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
NBC did ask to be sold off as one company but someone said to the minister in charge of the sell off, that they'd be able to wave off any competition by another operator positioning buses from other depots amongst other things, & that was like a red light to a bull, so the company ended up being broken up.

I doubt it. There had been a programme of splitting up the larger firms in readiness for privatisation and deregulation starting with Midland Red in 1981 and continuing until 1986.
 

smtglasgow

Member
Joined
15 Feb 2011
Messages
472
Location
Glasgow & London
If you’re *really* interested and near London, there is a huge amount of documents relating to the NBC in the National Archives in Kew. I had a look at some of the papers relating to M.A.P. when I was supposed to be researching my PhD. Not sure if anything’s been digitised – probably not – but there is a lot there for anyone wanting a deep dive.
 

carlberry

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2014
Messages
3,169
I doubt it. There had been a programme of splitting up the larger firms in readiness for privatisation and deregulation starting with Midland Red in 1981 and continuing until 1986.
I believe the idea to sell as one block was NBC's original suggestion, I think they also came up with an idea to sell blocks based on regions (the regions that NBC was managed in at the time). The government really wanted competition to happen (the trial areas had proved how good it could be with instances of wheels falling off buses in Hereford etc) and the deregulation of coaches had proved that the government's belief that private enterprise would run public companies off the road didn't hold up when National Express actually fought back instead of rolling over as was expected.
Splitting the companies didn't actually come from privatisation. Midland Red was split because it was the easiest way to deal with getting rid of the central costs of a company that had become a basket case. I worked for Bristol Omnibus at the time it happened and the first that most staff in Bristol knew about it was the arrival of some senior staff with various bits of paperwork (Bristol became the head office of one of the new companies for a while) on the day the redundancy notices went out at Midland Red HQ. After that settled down the Southern division of NBC was attracted to the idea of more local management, mostly as it meant a easy way of cost cutting but also because some of the Midland Red companies had actually started to achieve useful changes from the new way of working. Once privatisation and deregulation appeared more certain NBC actually stopped the process which is why later ones were forced on it by the government, especially in the Northern Division (United and Ribble for example).

There is a very good book that was written about the NBC and it's closure by the Transport Publishing Company (ISBN 0863171478), however it needs a fork lift truck to move it. As it contains the text of a great many interviews with people at the time it's not bedtime reading!
 

Statto

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2011
Messages
3,208
Location
At home or at the pub
I doubt it. There had been a programme of splitting up the larger firms in readiness for privatisation and deregulation starting with Midland Red in 1981 and continuing until 1986.

One of my buses yearbooks has a chapter on d-reg & early years afterwards with the affect on bus companies, that NBC asked to be sold as one company, the minister in charge agreed at first, but as i said, that scenario made him change his mind so NBC was split in smaller ops, ironically most former NBC operators are now part of one of the big companies
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,965
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
I believe the idea to sell as one block was NBC's original suggestion, I think they also came up with an idea to sell blocks based on regions (the regions that NBC was managed in at the time). The government really wanted competition to happen (the trial areas had proved how good it could be with instances of wheels falling off buses in Hereford etc) and the deregulation of coaches had proved that the government's belief that private enterprise would run public companies off the road didn't hold up when National Express actually fought back instead of rolling over as was expected.
Splitting the companies didn't actually come from privatisation. Midland Red was split because it was the easiest way to deal with getting rid of the central costs of a company that had become a basket case. I worked for Bristol Omnibus at the time it happened and the first that most staff in Bristol knew about it was the arrival of some senior staff with various bits of paperwork (Bristol became the head office of one of the new companies for a while) on the day the redundancy notices went out at Midland Red HQ. After that settled down the Southern division of NBC was attracted to the idea of more local management, mostly as it meant a easy way of cost cutting but also because some of the Midland Red companies had actually started to achieve useful changes from the new way of working. Once privatisation and deregulation appeared more certain NBC actually stopped the process which is why later ones were forced on it by the government, especially in the Northern Division (United and Ribble for example).

There is a very good book that was written about the NBC and it's closure by the Transport Publishing Company (ISBN 0863171478), however it needs a fork lift truck to move it. As it contains the text of a great many interviews with people at the time it's not bedtime reading!

To be fair, the decision to split Midland Red was ahead of the thought of privatisation. As you say, it had been haemorrhaging money since the 1973 sale of the West Mids operations to WMPTE.

Appreciate that the first split of BOC and those of WNOC and H&D were perhaps for the reasons of improved local accountability, but when Nicholas Ridley arrived in 1983, I thought it was full steam ahead with splitting for privatisation?
 

Statto

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2011
Messages
3,208
Location
At home or at the pub
To be fair, the decision to split Midland Red was ahead of the thought of privatisation. As you say, it had been haemorrhaging money since the 1973 sale of the West Mids operations to WMPTE.

Appreciate that the first split of BOC and those of WNOC and H&D were perhaps for the reasons of improved local accountability, but when Nicholas Ridley arrived in 1983, I thought it was full steam ahead with splitting for privatisation?

Yep i think NBC regretted selling the West Midlands routes, why they kept there routes in other PTE areas especially in Liverpool were Ribble operated a load of joint routes with the Merseyside PTE through Bootle, & Kirkdale areas, Crosville too had a large presence in South Liverpool
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,965
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
Yep i think NBC regretted selling the West Midlands routes, why they kept there routes in other PTE areas especially in Liverpool were Ribble operated a load of joint routes with the Merseyside PTE through Bootle, & Kirkdale areas, Crosville too had a large presence in South Liverpool
I think I recall reading that they were happy to paint their vehicles in Tyne & Wear and West Yorkshire, apply logos, revise fair structures etc if only to avoid a repetition of West Midlands.
 

Statto

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2011
Messages
3,208
Location
At home or at the pub
I think I recall reading that they were happy to paint their vehicles in Tyne & Wear and West Yorkshire, apply logos, revise fair structures etc if only to avoid a repetition of West Midlands.

In Merseyside Ribble & Crosville charged PTE fares but kept there NBC liveries of red & green, i liked the NBC leaf green livery but not so much the poppy red livery, the darker cherry red livery was better.

Yorkshire Coastliner was blue version of the NBC livery wasn't it, & apart from T&W & West Yorkshire, which other NBC areas had liveries other than red & green?
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,965
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
In Merseyside Ribble & Crosville charged PTE fares but kept there NBC liveries of red & green, i liked the NBC leaf green livery but not so much the poppy red livery, the darker cherry red livery was better.

Yorkshire Coastliner was blue version of the NBC livery wasn't it, & apart from T&W & West Yorkshire, which other NBC areas had liveries other than red & green?

Yorkshire Coastliner was a very late example of NBC branding in a blue and white colour scheme for the Leeds to York to Scarborough service. One of many similar "Venetian Blind" liveries that appeared in the mid 1980s. You're not thinking of East Yorkshire that had a blue version of NBC livery for a few early deliveries before adopting poppy red? Other firms that had a blue livery were Midland General (absorbed by Trent) and Sunderland District (absorbed by Northern) until the mid-late 1970s, and Jones of Aberbeeg that survived until 1980/1.

Midland Red East also had a variation on red, adopting an overall dark red....until the mystery was solved and it was the base colour for the Midland Fox scheme.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
Yorkshire Coastliner was a very late example of NBC branding in a blue and white colour scheme for the Leeds to York to Scarborough service. One of many similar "Venetian Blind" liveries that appeared in the mid 1980s. You're not thinking of East Yorkshire that had a blue version of NBC livery for a few early deliveries before adopting poppy red? Other firms that had a blue livery were Midland General (absorbed by Trent) and Sunderland District (absorbed by Northern) until the mid-late 1970s, and Jones of Aberbeeg that survived until 1980/1.

Midland Red East also had a variation on red, adopting an overall dark red....until the mystery was solved and it was the base colour for the Midland Fox scheme.
Classic Bus magazine a few issues ago had quite a bit on why Midland General adopted blue and white, with subsequent readers' letters amplifying and correcting in typical CB fashion! As it's a geographical area I've never known, I can't remember any detail, I'm afraid, but it was basically something to do with an ex-BET company asserting itself against an ex-BTC company now in the same group IIRC.
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,179
Yep i think NBC regretted selling the West Midlands routes, why they kept there routes in other PTE areas especially in Liverpool were Ribble operated a load of joint routes with the Merseyside PTE through Bootle, & Kirkdale areas, Crosville too had a large presence in South Liverpool

I'm not sure that NBC really had a lot of choice but to sell the BMMO Birmingham & Black Country operations. They were dreadfully short of staff, and the pay and conditions lower than the ex-Municipal operations which formed WMPTE. At that time, Midland Red was party to the national pay agreement for company staff (NCOI) and could not pay more (even if it had wanted to, which it did not in the more rural parts of the company). Additionally the NBC was faced with a huge capital investment of replacing the ex BMMO type buses all over Midland Red, for which spares were increasingly difficult and expensive to obtain and would not last the normal span of life. Offloading some of this capital investment, and the pay problem, to WMPTE would have looked a good deal, even though it saddled them with a not so profitable rest of Midland Red.
It must be remembered that most of the NBC subsidiaries (apart from some northern firms) had lurched into the red by this time, and they had had another problem company foisted onto them (London Country Bus Services Ltd) which had a similar capital expenditure problem and was seriously unprofitable.
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,179
I think I recall reading that they were happy to paint their vehicles in Tyne & Wear and West Yorkshire, apply logos, revise fair structures etc if only to avoid a repetition of West Midlands.

I don't think that the NBC operations around Tyne & Wear and West Yorkshire had anything like the structural problems that BMMO had, and an agency agreement was far more practicable. Of course SELNEC took over former North Western Road Car services in the Stockport area, when that company was dismembered.
 

Statto

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2011
Messages
3,208
Location
At home or at the pub
I'm not sure that NBC really had a lot of choice but to sell the BMMO Birmingham & Black Country operations. They were dreadfully short of staff, and the pay and conditions lower than the ex-Municipal operations which formed WMPTE. At that time, Midland Red was party to the national pay agreement for company staff (NCOI) and could not pay more (even if it had wanted to, which it did not in the more rural parts of the company). Additionally the NBC was faced with a huge capital investment of replacing the ex BMMO type buses all over Midland Red, for which spares were increasingly difficult and expensive to obtain and would not last the normal span of life. Offloading some of this capital investment, and the pay problem, to WMPTE would have looked a good deal, even though it saddled them with a not so profitable rest of Midland Red.
It must be remembered that most of the NBC subsidiaries (apart from some northern firms) had lurched into the red by this time, and they had had another problem company foisted onto them (London Country Bus Services Ltd) which had a similar capital expenditure problem and was seriously unprofitable.

Didn't Midland Red have a lot of crew operated buses in the West Midlands area too, no doubt the WMPTE wanted them to convert to omo buses but miles easier after they brought Midland Red. Which was similar to Merseyside were apparently[as i'm too young to remember] the PTE were on Crosville & Ribbles backs to convert there Merseyside area fleet to omo, Crosville finaly fully converted to omo in 81, not sure when Ribble fully converted to omo though.
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,179
Didn't Midland Red have a lot of crew operated buses in the West Midlands area too, no doubt the WMPTE wanted them to convert to omo buses but miles easier after they brought Midland Red. Which was similar to Merseyside were apparently[as i'm too young to remember] the PTE were on Crosville & Ribbles backs to convert there Merseyside area fleet to omo, Crosville finaly fully converted to omo in 81, not sure when Ribble fully converted to omo though.

Midland Red was little different to the rest of the NBC (and the rest of the industry) in its proportion of crew operated buses; all of them were rushing headlong into OMO conversion in the 1970s, both to reduce operating costs and to increase earnings for those remaining ('Fewer but better paid staff') to aid recruitment and retention. One of the constraints to conversion was suitable vehicles (half cab double deckers and manual gearbox saloons were not considered so for the intensive urban Midland Red Black Country services) and raising the capital required was a problem for the inherently loss making businesses. Government introduced 'bus grant' to assist with the process, but this did have the unfortunate side effect of increasing new bus prices! WMPTE, with mainly good urban routes and finances bolstered by ratepayers, would have had less capital constraint at that time and could replace the rolling stock quicker than NBC would have been able.

In your other example, Merseyside PTE would have been keen for Crosville & Ribble to convert to OMO on routes running into Merseyside in order to reduce their subsidy costs. However, all the other Local Authorities that these companies served would be doing the same!
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,965
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
Midland Red was little different to the rest of the NBC (and the rest of the industry) in its proportion of crew operated buses; all of them were rushing headlong into OMO conversion in the 1970s, both to reduce operating costs and to increase earnings for those remaining ('Fewer but better paid staff') to aid recruitment and retention. One of the constraints to conversion was suitable vehicles (half cab double deckers and manual gearbox saloons were not considered so for the intensive urban Midland Red Black Country services) and raising the capital required was a problem for the inherently loss making businesses. Government introduced 'bus grant' to assist with the process, but this did have the unfortunate side effect of increasing new bus prices! WMPTE, with mainly good urban routes and finances bolstered by ratepayers, would have had less capital constraint at that time and could replace the rolling stock quicker than NBC would have been able.

In your other example, Merseyside PTE would have been keen for Crosville & Ribble to convert to OMO on routes running into Merseyside in order to reduce their subsidy costs. However, all the other Local Authorities that these companies served would be doing the same!

The reasons why NBC offloaded Midland Red may have made sense at the time. They were suffering major staff shortages and reliability in West Midlands was poor, which was one reason why WMPTE wanted to take the operations over. Also, remember that Midland Red had undergone a major cost cutting drive in 1971, closing a number of depots.

Unfortunately, despite the optimism that they could expand into new areas (e.g. Redditch, Telford) and taking over Harpers, they soon realised that Birmingham/Black Country as well as Leicester had been underpinning a huge rural hinterland that was unremunerative; depots like Hereford, Stratford, Evesham, Ludlow, Shrewsbury and Banbury were losing a small fortune, and that prompted the Viable Network Project that then became MAP.

Based on that experience, I think I read that NBC were more disposed to bend over and accommodate the demands of PTEs.

As an aside, Midland Red had just received a major order of Leyland Nationals and were due some Atlanteans though these were then diverted to LCBS IIRC when the deal was brokered.
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,179
The reasons why NBC offloaded Midland Red may have made sense at the time. They were suffering major staff shortages and reliability in West Midlands was poor, which was one reason why WMPTE wanted to take the operations over. Also, remember that Midland Red had undergone a major cost cutting drive in 1971, closing a number of depots.

Unfortunately, despite the optimism that they could expand into new areas (e.g. Redditch, Telford) and taking over Harpers, they soon realised that Birmingham/Black Country as well as Leicester had been underpinning a huge rural hinterland that was unremunerative; depots like Hereford, Stratford, Evesham, Ludlow, Shrewsbury and Banbury were losing a small fortune, and that prompted the Viable Network Project that then became MAP.

Based on that experience, I think I read that NBC were more disposed to bend over and accommodate the demands of PTEs.

As an aside, Midland Red had just received a major order of Leyland Nationals and were due some Atlanteans though these were then diverted to LCBS IIRC when the deal was brokered.

Midland Red were not alone in having a major cost cutting drive in 1971; I think this was an NBC policy following the lurch into losses by most subsidiaries in the previous couple of years. Western National, Western Welsh, Hants & Dorset, Ribble all closed depots and some abandoned territory also.
I think it was well known before the sale that the Birmingham/Black Country operations were financially underpinning Midland Red; indeed the West Midlands Traffic Commissioner publicly commented on this at the hearing to transfer the Road Service Licences between the operators. However, for the reasons already stated, there was probably little option.
When the original PTEs were set up, it was Government policy that the PTE would directly operate all services running wholly the area (or at least certainly those publicly owned). Both SELNEC and WMPTE acquired the NBC services affected. Both undertakings had quite a problem harmonising the terms and conditions of their constituent parts, with the Trade Unions naturally wanting to 'cherry pick' the best out of each. In the WMPTE in particular, where competition for labour was at its fiercest, this had the effect of making busmens wages more competitive against the local manufacturing industry. Govt. policy later eased, and especially in the areas where the labour market was not so tight, it was realised that 'Agency' arrangements between PTE and NBC concerns were a more cost effective solution.

History made be about to repeat itself, with some City regions wishing to franchise the profitable operations of major bus groups, which are underpinning the finances of the 'shire' county operations (most of which have no interest in franchising, due to the cost). This will cause eventual collapse of these companies, just like the Midland Red of yore!
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,965
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
Midland Red were not alone in having a major cost cutting drive in 1971; I think this was an NBC policy following the lurch into losses by most subsidiaries in the previous couple of years. Western National, Western Welsh, Hants & Dorset, Ribble all closed depots and some abandoned territory also.
I think it was well known before the sale that the Birmingham/Black Country operations were financially underpinning Midland Red; indeed the West Midlands Traffic Commissioner publicly commented on this at the hearing to transfer the Road Service Licences between the operators. However, for the reasons already stated, there was probably little option.
When the original PTEs were set up, it was Government policy that the PTE would directly operate all services running wholly the area (or at least certainly those publicly owned). Both SELNEC and WMPTE acquired the NBC services affected. Both undertakings had quite a problem harmonising the terms and conditions of their constituent parts, with the Trade Unions naturally wanting to 'cherry pick' the best out of each. In the WMPTE in particular, where competition for labour was at its fiercest, this had the effect of making busmens wages more competitive against the local manufacturing industry. Govt. policy later eased, and especially in the areas where the labour market was not so tight, it was realised that 'Agency' arrangements between PTE and NBC concerns were a more cost effective solution.

History made be about to repeat itself, with some City regions wishing to franchise the profitable operations of major bus groups, which are underpinning the finances of the 'shire' county operations (most of which have no interest in franchising, due to the cost). This will cause eventual collapse of these companies, just like the Midland Red of yore!

Very true about 1971 - Western National vacated North Cornwall in entirety and there were scores of closures with Southdown. My point was (and to be fair, true about the other areas you mentioned) that even with these economies, Midland Red was still in a parlous state. The point about T&C harmonisation is also true; I have read that for a period, a third company was created to sit between BMMO and WMPTE to pay the former BMMO employees until the alignment was completed.

Your final paragraph is all too prescient. The larger, stronger operations that tend to be in the PTE areas soak up a lot of central overhead and provide a sensible means of cascading fleet to the provinces. I can't help but agree.
 

Man of Kent

Member
Joined
5 Jul 2018
Messages
590
Very true about 1971 - Western National vacated North Cornwall in entirety and there were scores of closures with Southdown. My point was (and to be fair, true about the other areas you mentioned) that even with these economies, Midland Red was still in a parlous state. The point about T&C harmonisation is also true; I have read that for a period, a third company was created to sit between BMMO and WMPTE to pay the former BMMO employees until the alignment was completed.
There were revisions to the drivers' hours legislation in 1971, which broadly introduced what we now know as domestic driving hours. These rules were more restrictive than what had preceded them, and the slaughter of (especially) rural bus services appears to have been an unintended consequence.
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,135
There were revisions to the drivers' hours legislation in 1971, which broadly introduced what we now know as domestic driving hours. These rules were more restrictive than what had preceded them, and the slaughter of (especially) rural bus services appears to have been an unintended consequence.
What we're the rules before the 1971 change?
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,965
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
There were revisions to the drivers' hours legislation in 1971, which broadly introduced what we now know as domestic driving hours. These rules were more restrictive than what had preceded them, and the slaughter of (especially) rural bus services appears to have been an unintended consequence.
What we're the rules before the 1971 change?

Before my time in terms of drivers' hours legislation

It's very difficult to fully appreciate the issues that beset the bus industry in the 1970s. The staff shortages were so pronounced; seem to recall that Hants & Dorset had massive problems in Southampton/Eastleigh with other major employers like Ford paying much more.
 

Whisky Papa

Member
Joined
8 Aug 2019
Messages
384
There were revisions to the drivers' hours legislation in 1971, which broadly introduced what we now know as domestic driving hours. These rules were more restrictive than what had preceded them, and the slaughter of (especially) rural bus services appears to have been an unintended consequence.

I've just been having a dig online, and the Transport Act 1968 (Part VI as amended) and Drivers’ Hours (Passenger and Goods Vehicles) (Modifications) Order 1971 are indeed quoted as the basis of our current domestic regulations. Reading the transcript of a House of Lords debate prior to the 1971 legislation, it appears to me that the 1971 modifications were actually intended to relax some elements of the 1968 act which had proved unworkable and were resulting in large amounts of lost mileage. I certainly stand open to correction if somebody has more detail, but was the real damage done in 1968?

Very true about 1971 - Western National vacated North Cornwall in entirety and there were scores of closures with Southdown.

In Keith Turns's excellent book The Independent Bus, one of the companies featured was Jennings of Bude. His take on the WNOC withdrawl from North Cornwall was that all NBC subsidiaries had been instructed to open negotiations with their relevant shire counties regarding subsidy of loss-making routes, I presume as a result of a change of legislation allowing such support. I sadly no longer have the book, but I am sure his wording regarding WNOC approaching Cornwall CC was that "This met with a very chilly response, and with six whole weeks notice in the middle of the holiday season, the company announced the closure of Bude, Delabole (and a couple of others I can't now recall) garages."


Regarding the various comments made about the lack of attractiveness of bus drivers' wages in areas with large amounts of manufacturing industry, I remember visiting WMPTE's Schedules Office in Birmingham in the early 80s, and being surprised to find they paid OFH (Outside Factory Hours) payments to compensate staff for unsocial hours. I think it was anything outside 0600-1800 Mon-Fri? There was nothing similar at GMPTE, only an additional payment for hours after 1300 on Saturdays.
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,965
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
In Keith Turns's excellent book The Independent Bus, one of the companies featured was Jennings of Bude. His take on the WNOC withdrawl from North Cornwall was that all NBC subsidiaries had been instructed to open negotiations with their relevant shire counties regarding subsidy of loss-making routes, I presume as a result of a change of legislation allowing such support. I sadly no longer have the book, but I am sure his wording regarding WNOC approaching Cornwall CC was that "This met with a very chilly response, and with six whole weeks notice in the middle of the holiday season, the company announced the closure of Bude, Delabole (and a couple of others I can't now recall) garages."

I don't doubt it. The impact on Bude was pronounced having lost their rail line 5 years earlier.

It is before my time, and someone like @RT4038 will know better, but there was a provision in the 1968 Act that allowed for Exchequer Aid to support 50% of the cost of a service as long as the local authority paid the other 50%??? Certain counties did support services, others didn't so you had those sorts of cuts as in Cornwall (compare to today o_O ) and also places like Pembrokeshire. I also seem to recall that as Crosville had had more success negotiating with Ceredigion in obtaining subsidies, that's why the depots at New Quay and Newcastle Emlyn transferred from Western Welsh though that might be apocryphal.

Don't know about the drivers' hours legislation but again recall reading that it was one of the factors that prompted King Alfred to sell out to H&D.
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,179
What we're the rules before the 1971 change?

The original drivers hours were contained in the s19 of 1930 Road Traffic Act, the relevant section being reproduced below:

19.-(1) With a view to protecting the public against the, risks which arise in cases where the drivers of motor vehicles are suffering from excessive fatigue, it is hereby enacted that it shall not be lawful in the case of- (a) any public service vehicle within the meaning of Part IV of this Act; (b) any heavy locomotive, light locomotive or motor tractor; or (c) any motor vehicle constructed to carry goods other than the effects of passengers ; for any person to drive or cause or permit any person employed by him or subject to his orders to drive- (i) for any continuous period of more than five hours and one half ; or (ii) for continuous periods amounting in the aggregate to more than eleven hours in any period of twenty-four hours commencing two hours after midnight ; or (iii) so that the driver has not at least ten consecutive hours for rest in any period of twenty-four hours calculated from the commencement of any period of driving :Provided that it shall be a sufficient compliance with the provisions of paragraph (iii) if the driver has at least nine consecutive hours for rest in any such period of twenty-four hours provided that he has an interval of at least twelve consecutive hours for rest in the next following period of twenty-four hours.
(2) For the purposes of this section- (a) any two or more periods of time shall be deemed to be a continuous period unless separated by an interval of not less than half-an-hour - in which the driver is able to obtain rest and refreshment ; (b) any time spent by a driver on other work in connection with a vehicle or the load carried thereby, including in the case of a public service vehicle any time spent on a vehicle while on a journey in any other capacity than as a passenger shall be reckoned as time spent in driving ; (c) in the case of a vehicle which is being used in the course of operations of agriculture or forestry a person shall not be deemed to be driving the vehicle or to be spending time on work in connection with the vehicle or the load carried thereby so long as the vehicle is elsewhere than on a road. (3) The Minister may, on the application of a joint industrial council, conciliation board, or other similar body, or on a joint application by such organisations, representative of employers and workpeople in the industry, as the Minister of Labour may certify to be proper bodies to make such an application, and after referring the matter to the Industrial Court for advice, by order vary the periods of time prescribed in this section, provided that he is of opinion that such variation is not likely to be detrimental to the public safety. Any order made under this subsection may be revoked or varied by a subsequent order made in like manner and subject to the like conditions. (4) If any person acts in contravention of this section, he shall be guilty of an offence : Provided that a person shall not be liable to be convicted under this section if he proves to the court that the contravention was due to unavoidable delay in stances which he could not reasonably have foreseen. (5) This section shall not apply to motor vehicles used for fire brigade or ambulance purposes.


In certain respects these rules are tighter than those pertaining now (minimum rest period of 9 hours in any period within 24 hours of starting duty appears to give a maximum spreadover of 15hr). I am unsure if there had been a relaxation of these rules at the time of the war, and not reverted?
I think the 1968 Act imposed a minimum of 10hr between duties, and this was relaxed to 8.5 hours on three days per week in the 1971 amendment. Note that the Drivers' hours provisions of 1968 Act was only implemented on 15 March 1970.

It is to be noted that the Driving hours was 11 (reduced to 10) and that there was no requirement for any rest days.
 
Last edited:

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,179
I don't doubt it. The impact on Bude was pronounced having lost their rail line 5 years earlier.

It is before my time, and someone like @RT4038 will know better, but there was a provision in the 1968 Act that allowed for Exchequer Aid to support 50% of the cost of a service as long as the local authority paid the other 50%??? Certain counties did support services, others didn't so you had those sorts of cuts as in Cornwall (compare to today o_O ) and also places like Pembrokeshire. I also seem to recall that as Crosville had had more success negotiating with Ceredigion in obtaining subsidies, that's why the depots at New Quay and Newcastle Emlyn transferred from Western Welsh though that might be apocryphal.

Don't know about the drivers' hours legislation but again recall reading that it was one of the factors that prompted King Alfred to sell out to H&D.

I think the problem was that most rural Local Authorities were not wishing to start spending money on bus subsidies, as hitherto these services had been provided without, or at least cross-subsidised from urban or inter urban routes with the bus companies, and invisible. They were mighty suspicious of bus company accounting, and not without good cause, as no proper (as we would understand it today) route costing system was available. There was also a view (with an echo today) that Central Government, who owned these bus companies, were trying to move their expenditure onto the Local Authorities. Whilst the 1968 Act permitted them to subsidise, it was not until the 1972 Local Government Act imposed a duty of 'co-ordination' that the local Authorities really started engaging.

The NBC started sending out these letters demanding money with menaces in 1971, and Local Authorities attempted to form a phalanx to resist. You are quite right that some authorities decided to pay up, or certainly make a contribution. Unfortunately, when you make 'either,or' type threats on a matter of principle, failure to carry out the threat would be seen as a weakness to the waverers, so the axe fell quite hard in some areas. (Never a good idea to be making business decisions solely on points of principle, and always give yourself a let out!).
Most NBC companies at that time simply did not have the capacity to make wholesale network changes to operate more economically. Bus timetables of 1970 were structurally the same as 1950, with evening and sunday services (in particular) simply cut out rather than modified. The 1971 cuts/1972 'co-ordinating' function of LAs forced the NBC to develop the Operational route costing system by 1974, the mechanics of which were transparent and understood by Local Authorities and assisted in getting all but the most parsimonious on board. At least then it was known where the losses were really being made - it was still another thing to develop profitable networks; hence MAP was developed by Midland Red and spread out to many (but not all) companies.

Whilst the Drivers' hours rule changes in 1970/1 did not help, I do not think that these had much to do with the 1971 letters and subsequent rural mileage cuts. The NBC companies were strongly unionised and I think the main problems were with long distance services and Tours/excursions, with some issues surrounding minimum rest periods between duties, particularly when changing from late to early turn weeks. Overall I think it was a reduction in flexibility rather than serious cost increases. Passenger numbers had been falling since the mid 50s, particularly off peak (refrigerators, so no need to shop daily), evening and Sundays (television and car ownership). Peak loadings were pretty buoyant (car owners often travelling by bus to/from work), and bus managers [District Traffic Superintendents in those days!] were fretting as to how to carry them all at once whilst grappling with crippling staff shortages and an ageing fleet with insufficient capital resource to replace. In the rural areas, the 1962 Agricultural Wages Act was encouraging farmers to mechanise, and village populations started to shift from land based staff to well-heeled commuters with cars. Bus crew/engineering wages costs were rapidly increasing (due to the shortage pressures) and overall revenue was going down. These two pressures passed each other in most companies by 1970, hence the 1971 letters.
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,965
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
I think the problem was that most rural Local Authorities were not wishing to start spending money on bus subsidies, as hitherto these services had been provided without, or at least cross-subsidised from urban or inter urban routes with the bus companies, and invisible. They were mighty suspicious of bus company accounting, and not without good cause, as no proper (as we would understand it today) route costing system was available. There was also a view (with an echo today) that Central Government, who owned these bus companies, were trying to move their expenditure onto the Local Authorities. Whilst the 1968 Act permitted them to subsidise, it was not until the 1972 Local Government Act imposed a duty of 'co-ordination' that the local Authorities really started engaging.

The NBC started sending out these letters demanding money with menaces in 1971, and Local Authorities attempted to form a phalanx to resist. You are quite right that some authorities decided to pay up, or certainly make a contribution. Unfortunately, when you make 'either,or' type threats on a matter of principle, failure to carry out the threat would be seen as a weakness to the waverers, so the axe fell quite hard in some areas. (Never a good idea to be making business decisions solely on points of principle, and always give yourself a let out!).
Most NBC companies at that time simply did not have the capacity to make wholesale network changes to operate more economically. Bus timetables of 1970 were structurally the same as 1950, with evening and sunday services (in particular) simply cut out rather than modified. The 1971 cuts/1972 'co-ordinating' function of LAs forced the NBC to develop the Operational route costing system by 1974, the mechanics of which were transparent and understood by Local Authorities and assisted in getting all but the most parsimonious on board. At least then it was known where the losses were really being made - it was still another thing to develop profitable networks; hence MAP was developed by Midland Red and spread out to many (but not all) companies.

Whilst the Drivers' hours rule changes in 1970/1 did not help, I do not think that these had much to do with the 1971 letters and subsequent rural mileage cuts. The NBC companies were strongly unionised and I think the main problems were with long distance services and Tours/excursions, with some issues surrounding minimum rest periods between duties, particularly when changing from late to early turn weeks. Overall I think it was a reduction in flexibility rather than serious cost increases. Passenger numbers had been falling since the mid 50s, particularly off peak (refrigerators, so no need to shop daily), evening and Sundays (television and car ownership). Peak loadings were pretty buoyant (car owners often travelling by bus to/from work), and bus managers [District Traffic Superintendents in those days!] were fretting as to how to carry them all at once whilst grappling with crippling staff shortages and an ageing fleet with insufficient capital resource to replace. In the rural areas, the 1962 Agricultural Wages Act was encouraging farmers to mechanise, and village populations started to shift from land based staff to well-heeled commuters with cars. Bus crew/engineering wages costs were rapidly increasing (due to the shortage pressures) and overall revenue was going down. These two pressures passed each other in most companies by 1970, hence the 1971 letters.

Excellent summary and some bits of knowledge that I wasn't aware of (like the Agricultural Wages Act). It's easy to look at pre-deregulation times as some utopian age yet wider demographic and social change was affecting bus services and operators. It's also easy to look at it with hindsight and undoubtedly there were some mistakes.
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,135
The original drivers hours were contained in the s19 of 1930 Road Traffic Act, the relevant section being reproduced below:

19.-(1) With a view to protecting the public against the, risks which arise in cases where the drivers of motor vehicles are suffering from excessive fatigue, it is hereby enacted that it shall not be lawful in the case of- (a) any public service vehicle within the meaning of Part IV of this Act; (b) any heavy locomotive, light locomotive or motor tractor; or (c) any motor vehicle constructed to carry goods other than the effects of passengers ; for any person to drive or cause or permit any person employed by him or subject to his orders to drive- (i) for any continuous period of more than five hours and one half ; or (ii) for continuous periods amounting in the aggregate to more than eleven hours in any period of twenty-four hours commencing two hours after midnight ; or (iii) so that the driver has not at least ten consecutive hours for rest in any period of twenty-four hours calculated from the commencement of any period of driving :Provided that it shall be a sufficient compliance with the provisions of paragraph (iii) if the driver has at least nine consecutive hours for rest in any such period of twenty-four hours provided that he has an interval of at least twelve consecutive hours for rest in the next following period of twenty-four hours.
(2) For the purposes of this section- (a) any two or more periods of time shall be deemed to be a continuous period unless separated by an interval of not less than half-an-hour - in which the driver is able to obtain rest and refreshment ; (b) any time spent by a driver on other work in connection with a vehicle or the load carried thereby, including in the case of a public service vehicle any time spent on a vehicle while on a journey in any other capacity than as a passenger shall be reckoned as time spent in driving ; (c) in the case of a vehicle which is being used in the course of operations of agriculture or forestry a person shall not be deemed to be driving the vehicle or to be spending time on work in connection with the vehicle or the load carried thereby so long as the vehicle is elsewhere than on a road. (3) The Minister may, on the application of a joint industrial council, conciliation board, or other similar body, or on a joint application by such organisations, representative of employers and workpeople in the industry, as the Minister of Labour may certify to be proper bodies to make such an application, and after referring the matter to the Industrial Court for advice, by order vary the periods of time prescribed in this section, provided that he is of opinion that such variation is not likely to be detrimental to the public safety. Any order made under this subsection may be revoked or varied by a subsequent order made in like manner and subject to the like conditions. (4) If any person acts in contravention of this section, he shall be guilty of an offence : Provided that a person shall not be liable to be convicted under this section if he proves to the court that the contravention was due to unavoidable delay in stances which he could not reasonably have foreseen. (5) This section shall not apply to motor vehicles used for fire brigade or ambulance purposes.


In certain respects these rules are tighter than those pertaining now (minimum rest period of 9 hours in any period within 24 hours of starting duty appears to give a maximum spreadover of 15hr). I am unsure if there had been a relaxation of these rules at the time of the war, and not reverted?
I think the 1968 Act imposed a minimum of 10hr between duties, and this was relaxed to 8.5 hours on three days per week in the 1971 amendment. Note that the Drivers' hours provisions of 1968 Act was only implemented on 15 March 1970.
Thank you
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,179
Excellent summary and some bits of knowledge that I wasn't aware of (like the Agricultural Wages Act). It's easy to look at pre-deregulation times as some utopian age yet wider demographic and social change was affecting bus services and operators. It's also easy to look at it with hindsight and undoubtedly there were some mistakes.

Yes, I don't think it was any easier then than it is now. Just different!
Whilst the NBC 'letters of 1971' might seem a little harsh, it must be remembered that bus fares were regulated by the Traffic Commissioners, and the Local Authorities had a statutory right of objection, which they invariably used to demonise the greedy/inefficient (in their view) bus companies. [Sounds familiar...!]. No doubt this was done to show that they had their voters interests at heart, but they were painting themselves into a corner (fares not high enough, so subsidy demanded). Timetable changes also had a similar procedure, and major reductions would also attract similar objections from the Local Authority, which would likely be upheld by the TC unless the company could prove virtually no use. The one thing that nobody could object to, or prevent, was the surrender of a Road Service Licence. I suspect that the routes around Bude and Delabole for instance would have had a certain amount of use, but not enough to be profitable. Trying to reduce or re-organise the timetable/routes would have taken an age via traffic court hearings and, no doubt, unwelcome attention to the management, so if no subsidy was forthcoming, surrendering the licence was probably seen as an action to quickly stem losses.
All this seems inconceivable with 34 years of deregulation under our belt!
Another social change of the era (early 70s) which adversely affected many rural services was the move to Comprehensive schools. In many areas, the (majority) children attending the Secondary Modern School would be taken by contract service (local coach operator) and the Grammar School children would go by service bus, using Season Ticket purchased by LA, to the nearest Grammar School usually located in a nearby big(ish) town. With Comprehensive Schools established all the pupils went by contract service (this would be too many to be accommodated on the service bus, and anyway often the school was located less centrally). This would often leave the service bus with insufficient custom to be economic and result in routes being circuitously merged, with a further loss of custom.
Certainly a litany of unintended consequences.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top