MORE INDUSTRY NEWS...
most recent
|
most popular
MORE TECHNICAL NEWS...
most recent
|
most popular
RELATED STORIES...
most recent
|
most popular
COMMENTED STORIES...
most recent
|
most popular


Governments have sacrificed the chance to use fatigue management to drive optimal safety outcomes because of their “messy” approach to the new laws, the Victorian Transport Association (VTA) claims.

VTA Chief Executive Phil Lovel has criticised the states’ approach to fatigue management, which has led to cross-border inconsistencies and some states enforcing the laws despite the fact no legislation or regulation has been agreed to.

According to Lovel, governments’ rush to enforce laws in the face of an unprepared bureaucracy and industry has created a sub-optimal safety outcome.

Lovel says many operators have merely tried to do the minimum to comply by September 29 because they did not have enough time to devote resources to delivering the best fatigue mitigation measures.

He says governments should have given the industry up to 12 months to move to the new laws from the date they were agreed to in order to give operators time to adjust.

“The implementation phase is not ideal, with many pieces of information and changes to regulatory and administrative processes still dribbling out from governments right up to the implementation date, and, it would appear, beyond that date,” Lovel says.

“As a result, what we are finding is that many transport operators are concentrating only on what they need to do as a minimum to comply, to fall over the line if you like.”

Because of this, Lovel says the industry “must mark a spot in the sand on this” and demand of governments from now on that any measures passed must be accompanied by sufficient preparation and implementation time.

“In future, give industry at least nine to 12 months clear air to plan for and implement the reform after governments have signed off on the legislative and administrative changes, particularly when there are multifaceted issues involving people, changes to operational and administrative system and training,” Lovel says.

This, Lovel claims, will give operators the chance to absorb what is expected of them.

In the meantime, he says industry groups must work with state road agencies as well as the National Transport Commission (NTC) to monitor fatigue management implementation “and work diligently to smooth processes during the first 12 months at least”.

Lovel also wants a cooperative approach regarding educative enforcement practices.

“Because the industry has been squeezed out of sufficient time for implementation, and multiple transitional arrangements are adding to confusion about the legal requirements, many well-intentioned operators and drivers will be caught short,” Lovel says.

But he warned the VTA will be aware of this and will defend and support anyone who it deems is unduly punished.

Victorian operators have been the hardest hit under fatigue management, as the Brumby Government ruled out a transition phase to the new regime unlike NSW, Queensland and South Australia.

Fatigue management laws aim to increase accountability in the supply chain by holding all those involved in the delivery of goods responsible for managing driver fatigue.
COMMENTS (4)
Comment by Rodney
posted 1 year ago
What happened to keep it simple stupid. We all got confused with the dream that Government and some industry representatives had of an ideal bit of Legislation. Think about 12-14-15 hours regimes and clearly all the complaints about road rest areas enforcement understanding etc go away if we just make it that 1 hour or 1.5 hours of breaks in total after initial 2 hours driving is all that is required. In other words give the drivers and their body the choice of when and where to rest. No confusion re truck stops full and what do I do now. No fines for frivilous mistakes and flexibility to operate as we should. Simple and easy for everyone to understand.
Comment by 73301
posted 1 year ago
Nobody in the transport industry will argue against the need to run a safe operation,(we are not idiots) and fatigue is just one aspect of that. It is shameful that the NTC is chest beating with regard to "getting it right on fatigue", they have completely missed the point that regulated work hours do not make people safe, the things that cause fatigue in human beings are much more complicated than that. It is also shameful that the respective Govt's cannot implement a common transitional period with regard to these new laws and the lack of knowledge of how the industry really works by the current lot of rule makers is really disturbing. They have not thought through the cause and effect on the industry and the ecomomy, the increase in operating costs, compliance costs and the significant reductions in productivity that will accrue. Other issues are the new log book design and the ability of many drivers to make them out properly combined with the draconian demerit points laws which are simply driving experienced drivers from the industry at a time when we can least afford it.
The solution to my mind is relatively simple, get rid of log books altogether, make it a preresquisite to fit GPS monitors to all vehicles over 12 tonne GVM that operate in the industry and have the authorities audit the GPS records at the business. Issue non conformances where necessary, as you would do in any Risk Management system and give operators reasonable time to rectify. If not rectified, withdraw licence to operate. Target only those operators who are known to be doing the wrong thing and leave the good operators to run their businesses in a safe, cost effective and profitable way. I am very hopeful that the new fatigue laws will save lives, (that is what we need to do), however I suspect that the NTC, the Road Traffic Authorities and all the hangers on will make a lot of money out of it at significant cost to an industry which is under great pressure and who is extremely frustrated by lack of action on cross border differences and escalating and in most cases non recoverable costs. As an aside, many more people are killed or maimed by Rigid trucks than by articulated trucks.
Comment by Kevin
posted 1 year ago
Congratulations 21884 you're right on the money, it's a travesty of justice to see what is going on in government regarding road transport, what is wrong with these people? We can see that it is a national disgrace, why can’t they see it? Do they really care? And our associations are just as weak, but don’t worry it will come home to roost sooner than later, it’s a shame we will lose so many good people before the realization hits home, but I guess that’s what it’s going to take.
Everyone should batten down and do the minimum to comply and at the same time buy as little as possible, show the true value of this industry in terms of its contribution to the economy.
Comment by 21884
posted 1 year ago
Yes all this is correct, however what the VTA spokesperson is omitting to point out just as loudly is the absolutely ridiculous situation that governments have created for transport operators crossing multiple borders, especially those that actually opperate from other states other than Victoria but have to travel either thru or into Victoria. Who helps us!! To say that the authorities will use "discretion" is a joke, all parties involved should HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME AT WHAT THEY HAVE CREATED including the NTC and all industry rep groups that supplied input. None of the parties appear to fully understand how ALL operators conduct their business as everytime we look at the legislation and look to abide with how it is written, the legislation is open to interpretation. No legislation should be able to be interpreted in multiple ways, but this legislation CAN and is being done so everytime we call the authority(ies) for an explanation!!!!
Wednesday, March 10, 2010