Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

depart from or reach a terminal in a large city at an inconvenient hour with a consequent deterioration of the long-haul service and loss of patronage. It is impossible, of course, to assess the volume of missed connections, failures of friends and relatives to meet incoming passengers, and myriad other frustrations resulting from this situation.

As noted earlier, this statement is limited to the urgent need for a uniform time standard. Our members have repeatedly gone on record in this respect as evidenced by the following excerpt from a resolution adopted by our association: "Whereas the problems of scheduling and the confusion arising from daylight time zones are being annually increased and compounded: Now, therefore, be it "Resolved, That the National Association of Motor Bus Owners urge upon the administration and the Congress that every effort be made to establish time uniformity in the coming year."

This resolution is in accord with the position of the National Trailways Bus System, the other organization to which I referred earlier and for which I am authorized to speak.

As I pointed out earlier, we strongly favor enactment of legislation as recommended by the Interstate Commerce Commission and provided in H.R. 4702 and H.R. 7891. If some modification of these bills appears essential, we urge enactment of H.R. 11483, introduced by the chairman, which is identical with S. 1033 as reported out unanimously by the Senate Commerce Committee. Our immediate and urgent concern, however, is achievement of time uniformity and we support any legislation which would contribute thereto. It is also the consensus of the intercity bus industry that general adoption of advanced (daylight) time between the last Sunday in April and the last Sunday in October is much to be preferred.

We earnestly request your committee to approve a measure which will meet the need for time uniformity. Its adoption would permit our carriers to provide a more convenient and attractive service for the approximately 460 million passengers we transport annually; it would eliminate much of the present confusion; and it would result in substantial reduction in unnecessary expense to the carriers. I am most appreciative of this opportunity to present our views and I shall be glad to attempt the answers to such questions as the chairman and members may have.

APPENDIX

EXAMPLES REPORTED BY INDIVIDUAL BUS COMPANIES

Minnesota observes daylight saving time from approximately May 24 until Labor Day morning.

Wisconsin observes daylight saving time from the last Sunday of April until the last Sunday of September. (Neighboring States stay on until the last Sunday of October.)

Iowa has local option daylight time in all cities except Council Bluffs as of this year. At the time the ordinance was passed in Waterloo City Council, the alderman proposing it was not certain when the rest of the United States went off daylight time, so he proposed a date of October 4.

Indiana was plagued with time boundary problems and year-round daylight time. To solve the problem of year-round time, the ICC issued an order redesignating the time boundary. Many community near this new boundary decided to unofficially hold "fast time." While traditionally the remainder of the State goes on central daylight time, more and more communities have been holding the fast time into the winter to correspond to eastern Indiana's eastern standard time.

The major problem, then, is uniformity of dates and observance. Example: Minneapolis-Chicago route has five annual schedule changes due to daylight time observance in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Illinois. Chicago and Milwaukee, 94 miles apart, are on the same time except for 1 month, September. On two lines, Omaha-Sioux City, and Fargo-Winnipeg, our buses use two routes one on each side of a river or State line. Each route is on a different time standard.

Scenic Hawkeye Stages operates from La Crosse, Wis. to Waterloo, Iowa, with a connection from Spring Valley, Minn. to these points. This company bridges connections between three major carriers, each of whom operates primarily in a State having different time observance dates (Iowa Coaches, Iowa, April 26 to October 4; Greyhound and Wisconsin Northern, Wisconsin, April 26 to September 27; and Jefferson, Minnesota, May 24 to September 7). The first of three carriers

[blocks in formation]

may also have difficulty because it serves the Dubuque area, which in the past has observed a fourth set of dates April 26 to October 25, to coincide with Illinois. This lack of uniformity costs Greyhound in the neighboring of $5,000 to issue timetables on odd dates.

The big cost is in having part of the United States observing standard time and part observing daylight time. If observance was national, two less annual schedule changes would be needed. Greyhound spends about $320,000 a year on timetables, of which at least $100,000 might be saved.

While customer inconvience is an intangible cost and our first concern, other tangible costs attributed to time confusion are:

Timetable printing.

Schedule negotiation between carriers.

Overtime to hourly terminal personnel on change dates.
Change or replacement of departure signs or boards.
Explanation time during telephone information calls.
Drivers run bids posting.

Mr. STAGGERS. Wonderful. That is what we are trying to get at here. Your statement will be included in the record. As you say, you hope for uniformity or some orderly procedure instead of the thing that is happening in the Nation today.

Mr. TRICE. We certainly do, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. STAGGERS. You think then, perhaps, that the Congress is the agent and the industry by which this should be accomplished?

Mr. TRICE. I think we have an excellent parallel to that. In a section of the country which I am familiar with, and I am sure you are, where Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee come together there, we have a situation of three different times. I don't see how anybody other than the Federal Government can control that situation, and I am from a States rights State, but I believe time is something Congress has to look into.

Mr. STAGGERS. The previous witness had said it is something that everyone is interested in and certainly we all want to know where we are going and we should have some uniformity to it. I can understand what is happening in the next door neighbor State or some place when people are going to some other destination. That is all I have.

Mr. Van Deerlin?

Mr. VAN DEERLIN. No thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Curtin.

Mr. CURTIN. No questions, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. STAGGERS. I want to thank you again for your statement. represent a very responsible segment of the economy.

You

Mr. TRICE. One thing I did want to mention to the committee is that we don't take in as much money as the railroads and airlines, but we haul about a third more passengers than the railroads and airlines combined and we serve many more communities than of course the railroads and airlines combined, so ours I suppose is the biggest problem in surface transportation.

Mr. STAGGERS. I am sure of that. You get to the grassroots. Thank you again.

Mr. TRICE. Thank you, sir.

Mr. STAGGERS. Our next witness will be Mr. Jack M. Slichter, vice president of the Air Transport Association of America.

STATEMENT OF JAMES B. EHRLICH, FEDERAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA

Mr. EHRLICH. Mr. Chairman, my name is James B. Ehrlich of the Air Transport Association of America. I have with me this statement of Mr. Slichter of the Air Transport Association and also the following witness, Mr. Donald E. Britt, assistant to the president, Piedmont Airlines, Winston-Salem, N.C.

These two gentlemen are unable to be here this morning and have asked me to introduce their statements for the record if the chairman will so permit.

Mr. STAGGERS. That certainly shall be done. Do you have any oral statement to make besides?

Mr. EHRLICH. No, sir; I believe the statements will stand on themselves.

Mr. STAGGERS. Might I ask you this in summary before you leave? Are these in favor of some legislation?

Mr. EHRLICH. Yes, sir. Mr. Slichter's statement specifically supports H.R. 4702 and H.R. 7891, saying that either one of these pieces of legislation would achieve the uniformity that you would seek in this matter, and Mr. Britt's statement does not address itself to any particular legislation, but generally is the subject of time uniformity and points out very pointed situations and problems in his area in West Virginia, the areas that they serve.

Mr. STAGGERS. Fine. Thank you very kindly Mr. Ehrlich. Do you gentlemen have any questions?

Mr. VAN DEERLIN. No. I am certainly impressed, Mr. Chairman, however, by the repetition of West Virginia's problem here. It must be real chaos.

Mr. STAGGERS. I wouldn't say that it is any more so than any place else in the Nation. They just happen, I expect, to run into West Virginia once in a while. We want to thank you, Mr. Ehrlich, and for the two statements and for the support.

Mr. EHRLICH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

(The statements referred to follow :)

STATEMENT BY JACK M. SLICHTER ON BEHALF OF AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION OF

AMERICA

My name is Jack M. Slichter. I am vice president of the Air Transport Association of America. On behalf of the scheduled certificated air carriers who make up our association I should like to comment on a number of bills being considered by this committee, all of them relating, in one way or another, to the establishment of uniform time standards. They are: H.R. 2335, H.R. 2532, H.R. 3114, H.R. 4702, H.R. 6284, H.R. 7891, H.R. 11206, H.R. 11210, H.R. 11407, and H.R. 11483.

At the outset I should like to express our appreciation for the opportunity extended us to testify on these bills. And, more than that. I should like to convey our gratitude to the committee for concerning itself with this problemwith the confusing and sometimes costly practices which have evolved since the Standard Time Act was adopted in 1918. In addition to conveniencing the traveling public and the common carriers who provide transportation throughout the country, we believe that orderly regulation of time, based upon clearly defined boundaries and geared to the tempo of the 1960's, will benefit the Nation as a whole.

From the airlines' point of view, there are three primary areas of concern: (1) the present lack of uniformity of dates for changing to and from daylight saving time; (2) the need for time uniformity within urban areas comprising

major transportation and business hugs; and (3) the necessity for the airlines to continue to apply Greenwich time to air traffic control and, in some cases, within an individual company for operational purposes.

Airline public timetables are published in terms of local time either daylight saving time or standard time, whichever prevails at the city concerned. This practice was started several years ago to eliminate some of the difficulties and confusion in informing the public which cities observed daylight time and which observed standard time and it has worked quite well, particularly for flight schedules to and from communities adhering to a standard conversion date. In such cases schedules can be computed and timetables issued at a minimum of expense to the airlines and with a maximum degree of assurance that the public will be correctly informed.

Unfortunately, however, all of the sections of the country observing daylight saving time do not adhere to a uniform conversion date. So, in order to present correct and current information to the public, the airlines are obliged to recompute schedules and reissue timetables each time another community changes over to daylight time, or vice versa. The exact costs attributable to these practices are difficult to compute, since the airlines may use such occasions to make other adjustments to schedules. But there is no doubt that a uniform changeover date would permit a reduction of costs.

Of immediate importance to the public is the fact that there are times when the airlines find it impossible to adjust schedules to accommodate nonuniform time changes without adversely affecting the public in other cities. When such situations arise the airlines must choose the course which would offer the best service to the maximum number of passengers and, as a consequence, some communities may suffer. However, we believe that it is in the public interest to publish timetables in local times and we see nothing in the proposed bills to overturn that practice.

With a view toward greater convenience to the public and with an eye on airline economy, we are in favor of any legislation designed to establish a uniform date for time conversion. We believe that H.R. 4702 and H.R. 7891 will achieve such uniformity at the same time leaving it to the agency designated by Congress to "define the limits of an advanced time subzone" to be operative from the last Sunday in April through the last Sunday in October each year. These bills are our preferences among those being considered since, in our view, they represent a balancing of the need to consider the requirements and desires of communities affected by time changes and the very pressing need for a uniform conversion date which I have emphasized.

Our second point concerns the need for time uniformity within closely associated business and transportation areas. An airport usually serves a large geographical area which may extend across State boundaries. In fact, in some instances, a community airport may be physically located in another State. Washington, D.C., and Cincinnati, Ohio, are good examples. While we have no specific proposal in this regard, we do wish to urge caution in establishing the boundaries of primary zones or subzones so that persons and businesses within a given community of interest will be operating on the same time standard.

Third, the airlines must make use of Greenwich time for air traffic control purposes. As a result certain internal operational procedures must also be keyed to Greenwich time. The Federal Aviation Agency has established Greenwich time as the standard for air traffic control. This, of course, was done in the interest of safety-in order that there could be absolutely no question that pilots, dispatchers, and traffic controllers were all on a common time basis for flight clearances. We are confident that all of the bills would leave this undisturbed, but out of caution we mention our need to use Greenwich time so that our right to do so will be made clear under any legislation that may be adopted.

Certain of our member airlines also apply Greenwich time to internal functions which may involve the safety of life and property in the air. For example, some airlines use Greenwich time as a standard for radio, telephone, or teletypewriter messages in order to eliminate misunderstanding among personnel located in many different time zones. Since these are wholly internal functions and in no way involve the general public, we submit that there is no reason for restricting the practice.

Because of our conviction that a nationwide standard time program ought to take into full account its effects upon the vital economic interests of communities and industries all over the country, we believe the Department of Commerce, its experience and responsibilities considered, is the appropriate govern

mental agency to administer such a program. Accordingly, we urge that it be the department so designated by Congress.

In summary, the airlines urge Congress to provide for the establishment and observance of a uniform system of time standards and measurement for the United States. We strongly support uniformity in time conversion dates, and urge that any time boundaries take into account the needs of the entire community and not just an entity thereof. In the interests of safety, we request that Congress make clear that no interference with the use of Greenwich time for air traffic control and other operational purposes is intended.

STATEMENT OF DONALD E. BRITT, ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT, PIEDMONT AIRLINES, WINSTON-SALEM, N.C.

My name is Donald E. Britt, and I am assistant to the president of Piedmont Airlines, based in Winston-Salem, N.C. Piedmont is one of the 13 local service, or regional, airlines stretched across our Nation. The nature of our operation requires that we make a number of stops along our route system to enplane and deplane passengers, and we are thus quite familiar with the matter of local communities exercising individually the right of local option in dates for switching over from daylight time to standard time and from standard time to daylight time. And I therefore believe that this testimony represents the view of the other local service airlines, and, for that matter, the trunk or long-haul airlines as well.

I shall, if I may, use Piedmont Airlines as an example of problems arising from clock juggling for two reasons: First, because I am obviously more familiar with Piedmont than with the other carriers, and secondly, because we consider Piedmont to be a classic example of an air carrier confronted with variations in time standards. I therefore trust you will forgive me if at least some of what I have to say from here on has the sound of a commercial for Piedmont.

One of the most vexing problems existing today for the traveling public is the variation in time standards used in communities to and through which the public travels on common carriers. Villages, cities, counties, and States have over the years established their own cut-on and cut-off dates for daylight saving time wherever it is in effect, thus creating difficulties for travelers. As an example, when one municipality goes to daylight time on one date in the spring, another on another date, another on another, and still another on another, for as many as a half dozen variations from community to community, the air traveler is beset with a genuine challenge to determine what really is the correct time as he moves from point to point. The switchovers to daylight time may begin in midApril and some communities do not change over until late June. This means then a 2-month period of uncertain time standards for the airline passenger, and the process is repeated again in the fall. Speaking at the very least for Piedmont Airlines, and I am confident for the other air carriers as well, we value our passengers too highly and need them too much to want any element of uncertainty or confusion put in their way.

A definite and measurable expense to all the airlines is the required reprinting and redistribution of system timetables with each time change at some individual point or group of points on the system. This expense is a concern of considerable magnitude to the public carriers. Piedmont, as an example, prints 75,000 passenger timetables to conform to switchovers from daylight time to standard time and standard time to daylight time, at a cost to our company per printing of about $5,000. If the Federal Congress enacts legislation which would establish daylight time to begin the last Sunday in April and end the last Sunday in October annually in the regions using daylight time, we would be able to reduce the number of our schedule changes per year to two, thus saving Piedmont a substantial amount of money over the years, significant to an air carrier attempting to curtail and eventually eliminate the need for Government subsidy. We know you are also responsive to this ambition of ours to reduce subsidy and that you are interested in helping us arrive at this goal in every practical and expedient way.

Larger airlines can, of course, save even more with uniform cut-on and cut-off dates since printing of passenger timetables for customers numbering in the millions per year represents a phenomenal expense in printing cost alone, not to mention man-hour expenses making the revisions, necessary aircraft rerouting, etc. It is also significant that the bus industry has testified that it spends

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »