Let‘s Talk Fleet Risk

Advanced Driver Assistance Systems - what driver managers need to know

Welcome to Let’s Talk Fleet Risk – a podcast for those who manage drivers and vehicles and want to reduce road risk in their organization.

 

In this episode I’m talking to Nick Reed, Founder of Reed Mobility and Chief Road Safety Adviser to National Highways about the active vehicle safety technologies known as Advanced Driver Assistance Systems. We’ll be discussing:

 

• How the latest driver assistance technology is keeping drivers safer
• Why fleet managers need to pay attention to vehicle safety ratings
• How telematics systems fit in to the vehicle safety technology suite
• Whether drivers could struggle with any of this technology
• The issue of maintaining driver concentration when these systems are doing some of the driving
• And finally, a quick look at where we are now with fully self-driving vehicles.

Tyre Safety Month - EV Vehicles, illegal tyres and other challenges

Show notes: Stuart Lovatt, Chair of Tyresafe

This is the second instalment of our 2-part podcast for Tyre Safety Month, where I chat to Stuart Lovatt, Chair of the road safety charity, TyreSafe.

In the previous episode we looked at:
· The number of tyre-related incidents and their consequences.
· The results of this year’s survey looking at the legality of tyres at the
point of replacement
· The specific tyre safety issues businesses need to look at for each
vehicle type including trucks and vans.

In this episode we continue that, looking at company cars and grey fleet, including the emerging concern regarding tyre safety on electric vehicles, and the safety implications of grey fleet drivers opting for part-worn second-hand replacement tyres to save money. We also discuss the key messages and resources that are part of this October’s Tyre Safety Month campaign.

Tyre Safety - the hidden impact on fleet managers

Show notes: Stuart Lovatt, Chair of Tyresafe

Welcome to let’s talk fleet risk – a podcast for those who manage drivers andvehicles and want to reduce road risk in their organisation. I’m Simon Turner, Campaign Manager for Driving for Better Business, and in this episode I’m talking to Stuart Lovatt, Chair of the road safety charity, TyreSafe. In a wide-ranging chat, we discussed:

The number of tyre-related incidents and their consequences.
The results of this year’s survey looking at the legality of tyres at the
point of replacement
The specific tyre safety issues businesses need to look for each
vehicle type including trucks, vans, company cars and grey fleets.
We talk about specific emerging issues around tyre safety for electric
vehicles.
The impact of poor tyre-management on the bottom line
This year’s Tyre Safety Month campaign and free resources you can
share with your drivers.

Fleet Safety Culture - leading or just managing?

Fleet safety culture.

Welcome to Let's Talk Fleet Risk – a podcast for those who manage drivers and vehicles and want to reduce road risk in their organisation. In this episode, I'm talking to Alison Moriarty about leadership and road risk management.

We’ll be discussing the difference between leading and managing; how to get buy in from senior leaders; the impact leadership has on safety culture; the importance of managing reputational risk; and how all of this can impact the organisation’s financial performance.

Fleet Accreditation - part of your risk management strategy?

Geraint Davies is the new concession director for FORS, the UK's leading fleet accreditation scheme. Established 15 years ago, FORS now boasts almost 5000 accredited operators who, together, operate over 90,000 vehicles. FORS are Driving for Better Business partners and this month's podcast offers insight into Geraint's breadth of experience across many areas of driver and vehicle management, and how accreditation can support fleet operators. 

 

Simon: Hello and welcome to this edition of Let's Talk Fleet Risk, a podcast for those who manage drivers and their vehicles and want to reduce road risk in their organisation.

 

Welcome to Let's Talk Fleet Risk. My guest for this episode of the podcast is Geraint Davis, who is the new concession director for FORS, the UK's leading fleet accreditation scheme. Established 15 years ago, it now boasts almost 5000 accredited operators who, together, operate over 90,000 vehicles.

 

Welcome to the podcast Geraint. So perhaps you could start by just telling us a little bit about what your role involves and what you're looking to achieve with FORS?

 

Geraint: It’s great to have the opportunity to join you today. Driving for Better Business is an initiative we at FORS fully support, and in my role as Concession Director I’m really looking forward to strengthening our ties with you. So, what does my role involve? Well, I will be leading the FORS team through the day to day of running the scheme, helping to develop a standard, and liaising with key stakeholders via the trade associations Logistics UK, RHA, and others; local authorities, politicians or the enforcement bodies. The DVSA, the Office of the Traffic Commissioner and such like along the way. I'm personally very passionate about FORS and the difference it brings for specifiers, our operators and as well the wider community.

 

So really, I'm looking forward to developing FORS as a leading quality assurance scheme, improving the value for our accredited operators and specifiers and also growing into new sectors where we can. In my previous roles at the coalface of the road freight sector. I have taken a business through FORS accreditation, I've worked through audits – I’ve been a FORS auditor and personally delivered FORS training. I know the benefits FORS can bring to an organisation when it comes to improving safety and efficiency, and essentially – and crucially – winning more business.

 

Simon: That’s a really broad role, and you alluded to some of the experience you've got over the last few years which we’ll come onto as we go through the podcast, because some of those I think are really interesting and relevant.

 

So, you've only been with FORS for a few weeks. You mentioned about your previous role as a FORS accredited operator – so you were Chief Operating Officer for John Raymond Transport, and while you were there you led the risk management strategy for over 22 years, wasn't it? So, I just wanted to sort of ask you what were the biggest challenges you faced when you when you started managing driver and fleet risk?

 

Geraint: Where do you start? John Raymond Transport has over 100 trucks and 200 trailers and multiple depots - over 150 employees. As COO my key responsibility is to make it work every day while delivering value for our customers and profitability.

 

While doing all this we also had to make sure we were operating to the highest standards of roadworthiness and complaints across all aspects of transport, business, and of course employment legislation – that's nothing new. These are challenges that every fleet operator faces every day, and you need systems and processes in place to give you and your team the confidence that it is a well-run business. That's easier said than done of course, and to be successful requires teamwork, and everybody pulling in the same direction with a set of common goals; one vision, if you will.

 

Communication is key, it’s the most important thing in my leadership toolbox. I've always been good at talking – that's what everybody says! And it’s developing the right framework and support, and also training. At John Raymond Transport, I delivered the driver CPC training myself. There won’t be many COO’s that do that, but it kept me close to the business, and gave me direct communication channels to the drivers – that pays dividends when you try to develop a winning culture in an organisation and take everybody on the journey with you.

 

Simon: Yes, it certainly does. 22 years you were there – that’s a very long time to be managing risk for one operator, so I was wondering what changes you saw over that time – in how you manage risk, and how the challenges evolved.

 

Geraint: Well, one of the most exciting things about the fleet sector is the constant state of change – be it technical improvements, legislation, or external impacts. During my time at John Raymond Transport, I worked through the stock market crash, the banking crisis, the credit crunch, and of course the pandemic – and now the cost of living crisis, and everything that that brings. All of these things brought about a massive change to the sector.

 

On a technical front, vehicle development has been dramatic. When I first started out, we had paper tachograph discs. I remember driving a Seddon Atkinson 401, and now we've got the Volvo I-Shift shift, and automated manual gearboxes, all sorts of things. Improving safety for vulnerable road users – that's been huge. We’ve seen big improvements in greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles. And we witnessed digitisation in the sector – whether it be digital tachographs, telematics, tracking. There’s a tremendous number of things available to operators, which at best were patchy when I first joined industry.

 

Data is the new oil. It needs to be refined in order to be used and be useful. The underlying lesson is you need to be flexible and adaptable to survive. As an operator in the sector, you need the tools and support to help you navigate your way through these changes. This is one of the key reasons why I recommended the FORS accreditation at John Raymond Transport 15 years ago. FORS has been right beside me, and we've evolved as a business, and as the industry has changed so has FORS. When I look forward to at the changes still to come, the biggest impact will come from decarbonisation of commercial vehicles. It’s on the horizon now. This is going to transform how fleets operate and I'm excited about how the next developments in batteries, electric or hydrogen vehicles, or alternative fuels, and how we’re going to adapt and bring them into fleets.

 

 

Simon: So, you mentioned that you brought FORS into John Raymond Transport 15 years ago. Now, we’re looking currently at leadership and business benefits as part of our campaign messaging. And presumably the FORS framework helped improve the way you were managing, and that's what led to some of the business benefits you saw. We recently published a case study that you helped us put together for John Raymond Transport which showed up reduction in incidents of over 23% year on year. But not only that – it showed a reduction in driver penalties by about 1/3, as well as improvements in fuel use and CO2 emissions. That's clearly very important to you as it demonstrates the value of the work that you've done – but I was wondering how those kinds of results were valued by the rest of the board. Did you have the support from the rest of the management team to do what you needed to do, and did they value what came out of it?

 

Geraint: Absolutely – from the board and the wider group. For an organisation to be successful you’ve got to get everybody on board, from the boardroom to the drivers rest area, and of course the technicians and everybody involved in the business. Vehicle safety and compliance can’t sit in a back corner outside the main performance indicators of the business, and I was always very appreciative that John’ Raymond Transport recognised that.

 

Ensuring you have a well-run business is obviously crucial to the financial performance of the organisation, which is a key consideration for the board. Improvements you mentioned around reduction in incidents and driver penalties are also important indicators for the underlying health of the business. And of course, they make a direct correlation with the bottom line.

 

Simon: You recently left John Raymond Transport and you've now taken up the role of Concession Director, which is a role with Sopra Steria, who now run the FORS programme. Sopra Steria only took over FORS at the beginning of last year, 2022, so perhaps tell us a little bit about what's happened with FORS since Sopra Steria took over, and how your role is going to fit into that. What are your objectives and aspirations for the FORS programme going forward?

 

Geraint: Well, it's a really great honour for me to take up this role. I know how important FORS can be for a business, as I’ve seen it from the other side, of course. Sopra Steria took over the administration of the scheme in January last year and it's been an exciting year of transition – keeping the service firing on all cylinders, while putting up the building blocks in place for future growth and development. We've trained over 4600 managers, seen over 130,000 e-learning courses taken, and we’ve funded over 1600 driver training courses, and delivered 265 practitioner courses - I think those are some great numbers and it's definitely something to build on.

 

And just a word on FORS practitioners – I’m one of them – they're a very important part of the FORS family. These people have a deep knowledge and understanding of the benefits of FORS, at a level equivalent to a master’s graduate. We’ll be looking to work even closer with our practitioners in future, and that's a key goal of mine.

 

Simon: Your past experience that we spoke about earlier - Chief Operating Officer and Transport Manager – you've also been Chair of Logistics UK's Road Freight Council. You've been a director of the RHA – that's obviously a great help. You've also been a FORS auditor and a Driver Trainer. This must be a fairly unique breadth of experience – so what kind of insight does all of that experience give you as you look to develop FORS and engage with fleet managers?

 

Geraint: What operators want… what operators need… I always think about that Mel Gibson film, What Women Want, where Mel Gibson has a terrible accident, gets electrocuted and can suddenly read the minds of women.

 

Well, I like to think we can get into the minds of operators, and we know what operators want now, and we’re much more aligned with that. My previous role at an operational level with John Raymond Transport, as a member and chair of the Logistics UK Road Freight Council, UK Road Freight Council at Westminster, and more recently, Director of the Road Haulage Association will certainly be a benefit as we move towards the future.

 

Simon: It was a very good film, and I think that is a good analogy for the sort of benefits that you can bring to FORS, so that’s really good. Now, there's obviously a number of audited accreditation schemes out there for fleet operators. FORS is probably the most well-known of those. Just being a bit agnostic about schemes for now, why should fleet operators consider registering with an accreditation scheme? What does it bring to the fleet operator?

 

Geraint: Well, for me, FORS has always been the benchmark for the fleet and transport sector, and this remains the case really. I certainly don't think there's an equivalent scheme offering anywhere near the breadth of the offering that FORS does at a holistic level. We’ve got nearly 5000 accredited operators as a testament to that. I think the vast majority of people in transport want to be known for running a good tight ship, and I think people want to work for those types of businesses.

 

On top of that, of course, customers want to work with transport suppliers they can trust. A trusted supply chain: that’s what FORS accreditation offers. I think of it as the equivalent of a Michelin star. The scores on the doors on the restaurant. It tells other people something about you that sets you apart. You’re a reputable business. You care about the people you employ and take the necessary precautions to look after other road users. It also says you're happy to have your systems and processes measured by a third-party auditor. It’s a mark of quality.

 

Simon: And these schemes typically go much further than the legislation or HSE guidance goes, as far as compliance for fleet operators. And I know FORS certainly goes a lot further than that – why is it so important to go further than what’s legally required?

 

Geraint: Right. I say that minimum standards get you a ticket to join the race. But if you really want to excel and demonstrate your capabilities to your clients, your competitors, and future employees then you need some means of differentiating yourself, which is where FORS delivers. It sets you apart from industry peers.

 

On another level, all of us involved in the industry have to strive to improve standards every day, and the FORS audit is one of the few measures where operators can demonstrate they're pushing the boundaries of safety, efficiency, and business performance.

 

Simon: Okay, so last question now. If a fleet passes their audit – and obviously many of your accredited fleets have done, you've got thousands who passed their audit – they've effectively been shown to meet the standard. But I'm wondering whether that's like a vehicle passing its MOT. Because, you know, the audit is a snapshot of the position on one day. So how does an accredited standard like FORS ensure compliance throughout the year, and what do you expect of your registered fleets to ensure that those high standards are continuously monitored and met?

 

Geraint: I think it's important that we see FORS as an accreditation… well, we see it as a process, or a business concept, rather than just a moment in time. It is a process. A culture. In passing the audit and gaining accreditation, a fleet operator has – in the first place – voluntarily put themselves forward for review. They said “yes, I think I meet the necessary standard in the way I run my fleet”. And then during the audit, they back that up with a demonstration that they have the systems, the processes, the data reporting in place to operate at the highest level, particularly if you achieve FORS Gold.

 

As I said legislative compliance is a minimum standard, and of course operators have to demonstrate that when they present the vehicles for MOT, annual test, or they’re stopped at the side of the road; a DVSA encounter, or it could be police CBU for a check. But have quality assurance processes in place within a FORS accredited operators’ business, and should – and I’ve emphasised should – ensure that these issues are picked up in the normal course of fleet operation.

 

Simon: Excellent answer – I think you're absolutely right. It's all about improving and strengthening culture because that's how you embed the improvement.

 

So, Geraint, thank you very much for sharing your insights with us today. I appreciate you sharing the case study as well that we put together on John Raymond Transport, and I will put a link to that in the show notes, and I wish you well for your new role in FORS. Geraint, thanks again for your time today.

 

_________________________

 

If you many drivers and their vehicles and you face similar issues to those discussed in this podcast, there are links in the show notes to some useful resources on the Driving for Better Business website – and these are all free to access. If you enjoyed the conversation, please don't forget to hit subscribe so you know when the next episode is released. And please also give us a 5-star review - this helps us to get up the podcast rankings and makes it more visible to others who might also find it useful. You can follow us – that's Driving for Better Business on Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn. And most importantly please help us to spread the word – all our resources are free for those who manage fleets, and their employees who drive for work. Thank you for listening to Let's Talk Fleet Risk, and I look forward to welcoming you to the next episode.

 

Brought to you by Driving for Better Business.

 

Driver behaviour - do you work with the data?

Simon: Hi everyone and welcome to Let’s Talk Fleet Risk. My guest for this episode of the podcast is Gareth Jones who is Group Fleet Compliance Manager at Speedy Asset Services.

Speedy Asset Services is the most recent good management case study that we’ve published on the Driving for Better Business website and I’m going to talk to Gareth about some of that in more detail.

Welcome to the Podcast Gareth.

 

Simon: Gareth – you’ve been with Speedy a long time so could you start with a summary of how you came to be involved in driver safety and fleet compliance, and what your role entails at Speedy?

 

Gareth: Thank you Simon. My journey into transport and fleet and driver training started many moons ago when I was employed with HM Armed Forces. From there, I spent a lot of time at DHL International in the driver training department. I first came to Speedy in 2007, as the Driver Trainer, and stayed there for just short of 7 years – covering all aspects of driver training, driver behaviour training, CPC which had just come in, accident management training, and various other training courses.

 

I then left the business for just over 18 months, and then came back to the business as the Group Fleet Compliance Manager, where my role then involved the HGV and van compliance, road risk management, and also duties around driver behaviours, and also dangerous goods safety advisor.

 

Simon: So, it’s obviously a very complex role - you’re running over 1,000 vehicles at Speedy but they’re not all just simple vans. You’ve got a lot of specialist vehicles, and open back vehicles where safe loading is critical. What are the key safety and compliance challenges you face in your day to day operations?

 

Gareth: The key challenges are that we must make sure that everybody who uses the road is always safe – that includes our drivers, but also all of the vulnerable road users at the same time. We all have a duty of care to make sure that everybody is safe at all times. So we ensure that our drivers go through a load security training programme for various types of vehicles.

 

So, we have a load security training programme for our tanker drivers. Some people wouldn’t class that as a load, but it is a load – it’s liquid. We have a load security course called The Light Side, for our transit drivers, and we have a heavy load security course for our heavy side drivers. We also have a load security course for our powered access side of the division which is run through the International Powered Access Federation. And all of that is captured on our internal training portal, so people can log in and see the progress, which has expiry dates and completion dates etcetera.

 

Simon: Safe and secure loading I think is one of the main challenges on the roads for most fleets – a lot of vehicles that get stopped by the DVSA and enforcement authorities are overweight, and it’s often not managed, so it’s really good to see you’ve got so many procedures and training programmes in place to make sure you’ve got all of that covered.

 

Gareth: Safety is at the heart of everything Speedy do – we have a simple rule: “fit one extra strap, just in case”.

 

Simon: Wise words. So, if we look at how you manage driver behaviour first, your case study shows a 13% reduction in collisions in 2022 over 2021 and a 90% recovery of uninsured loss. What have been the key factors in those achievements? What have you been doing?

 

Gareth: I think what you must first look at when you look at driver behaviour is that you need the data to understand where the driving behaviours and where you can have some wins. And with regard to wins, if you think about speeding – well if someone is speeding, what usually comes after that is a harsh braking event. So, if you look at the harsh braking and speeding events together as one event, you’ll get two actual subjects that you can cover off. And again, it’s simple things like speaking with the drivers, looking at the time of days these speeding events are happening, looking at the level of the speeding event, looking at the harsh braking event.

 

That’s not to say all harsh braking events are a bad thing – if someone has seen something like a ball or a child running out from the side of the road, and a harsh braking event happens, then that’s a good thing. It means they’ve seen it; they’ve observed it.

 

Talking to our drivers, and going through their driving behaviour… we send out monthly reports to our Chief Operating Officer, and that’s cascaded all the way down to the Depot Manager who then speaks to the drivers – and we manage that locally. With regard to our recovery from our uninsured losses, we have a fantastic Claims Manager who came into the business 4 or 5 years ago now, and we now actively manage our uninsured loss recovery – and she does it very well, to the point where she managed to get in excess of 5 figures back last year. I think it’s an area that sometimes some people forget to actually claim back.

 

Simon: It can make a huge difference to the bottom line and allow you to invest that in other areas.

 

So, we’re talking about speeding and harsh braking events, and all that data comes from systems like telematics and cameras. It’s clearly something that all vehicle operators should be looking at – I think with nearly all the really impressive case studies we share on our website, those improvements have been achieved with the help of that kind of technology but for operators who don’t use telematics and cameras, the impression is that there’ll be a lot of push back from drivers. How would you recommend fleet safety managers start that process of implementation?

 

Gareth: With telematics, we’ve had telematics in our vehicles since 2009 with relative very little pushback on the telematics as I remember back then. Like with any telematics data, it’s like a phone – it does go out of signal, and there are areas of the country where sometimes the telematics data does drop its signal, or you can get what’s called a Dual Speed Alert – so you could be driving on the A168 in North Yorkshire, or you could be driving on the A1. And if you’re driving on the A1, the speed limit is 70, but on the A168 it’s only 50. But because both roads run parallel you do sometimes get a discrepancy.

 

But unless businesses are willing to fit the telematics, you’re never truly going to understand driver behaviour to the point where you can better manage it. With regard to the cameras, we first installed cameras into our vehicles in early 2013 to be compliant with the new FORS & CLOCS regulations. Subsequently, we’ve now increased our cameras to having left, right, front, rear, load, and driver facing. We have then subsequently integrated our camera system company into our telematics system company, so that in the event of a harsh event, where the G-force has been triggered, it will automatically download the footage from 5 seconds before, during and after. That alert is then sent through to myself, the Fleet Director and the Claims Manager to view the footage.

 

Simon: You’ve got to be able to see the context around each of those events.

 

Gareth: Yeah, it gives us what we call our Golden Hour to deal with the third party if we’re deemed as liable, but also, we can better understand how the incident has taken place and interview the driver.

 

Simon: If we look at your vehicles now, I know you put a lot of investment into safety technology like cameras. Are you fitting other sort of other safety technology and why?

 

Gareth: Yeah, every day is a new day at Speedy and like I said earlier, safety is at the heart of everything we do, we’re always on the lookout for the next bit of technology. We’ve already decided to fit the new AI cameras, which supersede Sidescan. So these take away the need for Sidescan at the front of the vehicle, and so takes away the false alerts when it’s constantly buzzing off for rainwater, flies, cars, street furniture, rain, dust. The new AI cameras actually identify a hazard so that’s really good, we’ve fitted those.

 

We’ve recently installed a system called the FHOSS, the cycle safety system, where it illuminates an orange laser line down the left side of the vehicle, 1 metre away from the vehicle that’s only shown when the vehicle is turning left, on the indication. The more visibility you can give to cyclists and vulnerable road users of the vehicle’s intentions then it’s better for all road users. Like I said earlier, the safety of all road users is paramount to Speedy, not just ourselves.

 

 

Simon: I want to now get onto the key piece for me. We’re publishing this podcast and your case study as part of our current quarterly focus which is on leadership and business benefits. So I want to ask how engaged the board and the rest of your senior leadership team are when it comes to managing driver safety, and how supportive they are with any new initiatives you want to pursue.

 

Gareth: First and foremost, the Fleet Director Aaron Powell used to do my role, so the support from him comes naturally as he’s been where I’ve been. Our CEO, Dan Evans, has worked in various positions around the Speedy business, in sales, in the hire desk at the depot, he’s even been a drop driver at one point and I have great admiration for Dan that he supports everything that myself, Aaron and the fleet team do – and it’s his words that safety is at the heart of everything Speedy do.

 

Simon: I know you’re very proud of the fact that Speedy’s whole fleet has been accredited to FORS Gold for the 9 years now and that, you don’t just put drivers through the courses, you put managers through the courses too. Why is that important?

 

Gareth: If you’re going to manage a driver, there’s no point putting a driver through that course if you don’t understand the importance of the course and what it’s going to deliver itself. Having the knowledge of the objectives that the course will give to the driver is not only beneficial to all other road users, it’s beneficial to you that you manage drivers. And our managers do sometimes use our vehicles, so why not? Training is a free subject when it’s internal, and what better can you get than upskilling your skills in an area that, like I said earlier, can benefit all other road users?

 

Simon: And road safety is a shared responsibility, isn’t it?

 

Gareth: It’s a shared responsibility. Everybody needs to be safe. So, everybody does the FORS training, even some of our staff who just take a van home at night because there’s nowhere safe to leave the vehicle at night, they will do that training – the pedestrian safety, the cycle safety, and all other training that goes with it.

 

Simon: Very good. So for any fleet safety managers looking to better engage their board, success generally comes from being able to measure and monitor fleet activity properly so you can quantify risk and measure improvements & present it to the board. What are the key metrics you focus on? How do you monitor and report on that data?

 

Gareth: So we monitor our driver behaviour, we monitor tachograph infringement, and also, we have a Post-Accident Review Group meeting. So every month we gather all the information from our accidents, post-accident, we review all the data and look for the blame, whether driver, third party or 50-50. We then decide on a course of action for that, whether that be online driver training, classroom training, or a 1-to-1 driver training day, or if it needs to go to the next step in line with our policy.

 

It’s about having the data to look into driver behaviour – you can’t just sit down with a driver and say, “you were speeding”. You need to look at when and where he was speeding, how long he was speeding. And then, like I say, understand why he was speeding - but also explain the dangers of speeding as well.

 

Simon: How closely do you work with your insurers, for instance, on understanding the incident data and claims data?

 

Gareth: Very well, so we work really well with our insurer and it is through our insurer that we initially put our Post-Accident Review Group together. That includes myself – the Road Risk Manager, Aaron Powell – the Fleet Director, our Claims Manager… but it also includes somebody from HR, and somebody from Health and Safety, so there’s a clear, unbiased decision of which direction we should take the person involved in the accident in. That’s held monthly, and like I say, we get buy-in from our insurer because we actively look at each incident.

 

Every accident is an invitation to an incident or an accident. It’s up to you whether you turn up to it.

 

Simon: Very good. Some great lessons there for fleet managers and driver safety managers. Thanks for your time today, Gareth.

 

I’ll put links to both Speedy’s website and Gareth’s LinkedIn profile in the show notes, and also links to the case study we’ve just published.

 

Thanks everyone for listening.

 

-------------------------

 

Simon: If you manage drivers and their vehicles, and you face similar issues to those discussed in this podcast, there are links in the show notes to some useful resources on the Driving for Better Business website. And these are all free to access. If you enjoyed the conversation, please don't forget to hit subscribe - so you know when the next episode is released - and please also give us a 5 star review as this helps us to get up the podcast rankings and makes it more visible to others who might also find it useful. You can follow us - that's @DrivingforBetterBusiness on Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn, and most importantly, please help us to spread the word. All our resources are free for those who manage fleets, and their employees who drive for work. Thank you for listening to Let's Talk Fleet Risk, and I look forward to welcoming you to the next episode.

 

 

Weblinks

https://www.speedyservices.com/

https://www.linkedin.com/in/gareth-jones-62aab551/

 

Managing drivers & employer risk - how’s your fleet confidence?

 

Simon: Welcome to this edition of Let’s Talk Fleet Risk – a podcast for those who manage drivers and their vehicles and want to reduce road risk in their organisation.

 

Hi everyone, and welcome to Let’s Talk Fleet Risk. My guest for this episode of the podcast is Peter Golding, who is the Founder and Managing Director of fleet management software specialists FleetCheck. Peter, welcome to the podcast.

 

Peter: Thank you Simon.

 

Simon: Now, a little-known fact is that FleetCheck was actually the first commercial organisation that partnered with Driving for Better Business. When I started as campaign manager way back in 2016, I wanted to create a useful online resource that would help engage our audience of Fleet Safety Managers. I’d already known Peter for a few years by then and the new FleetCheck had created an online Fleet Management questionnaire some years previously – but it wasn’t being heavily promoted, and needed updating.

 

Peter and I rewrote the questions, FleetCheck’s IT team did the programming for us and we relaunched it as the Driving for Better Business Gap Analysis, in partnership with FleetCheck. It’s now been through a couple of major updates since then, but our current Gap Analysis still has that original work at its core.

 

So, Peter, you’ve always put helping Fleet Managers in this type of way at the forefront of the FleetCheck ethos. So where does that come from?

 

Peter: Well, Simon, thank you – and I appreciate the opportunity of being on this podcast. For me, I suppose it sort of started with the 10 years at the beginning of my career working within the main dealer network, and experiencing the service sector. But really predominantly from the 15 years’ experience of running my own garages. During that time I’d come across hundreds and hundreds of businesses who we supported – it was obvious we were very essential to them maintaining their fleet. What I identified from that is there are literally tens of thousands of businesses out there who really are unaware of the challenges they have. In my industry, there are some very good software solutions out there – they were very much geared around the larger fleet operators.

 

At the heart of what we wanted to do with FleetCheck is be the voice of the SME. To build something really designed for the small to medium sized fleet operator. We focussed massively on the commercial vehicle fleet – so we look at the van and truck side, but especially the van side because it’s the area that is most often ignored. I wanted to create something that was intuitive and easy to use, and really help the sector that were ignored, in my opinion. And now I’m delighted to say we are the leading provider of support to the SME of fleet operators in the UK.

 

Simon: Yeah, and I can vouch for that because prior to DfBB I ran two small fleets; one with just a handful and then a second company which had about 10-12 cars. And this information just wasn’t available to me at the time. I wasn’t aware of the responsibilities. And it was very difficult to find that help and support. And what you’ve just been outlining would have been hugely helpful to me in both of those roles.

 

But another project we worked together on more recently – probably a couple of years ago now, when we originally launched it – is the Fleet Confidence Challenge, a free online course containing over 30 short videos in 3 modules. I think it takes just under a couple of hours to get through all of them.

 

The first module tells the story of a van driver involved in a serious accident with a car driver and a cyclist. And it goes on to examine where both the driver and the employer were at fault. And we use this scenario as the basis for a mock trial presentation that we did just last month – a mock trial prosecution of a company. Why did you want to create the challenge, and why did you ask us to get involved?

 

Peter: Well, I think one of the biggest issues is that the individuals that often operate fleets… some of them are in the wrong place at the wrong time, and they have an interest in vehicles and they’ve been given the job of fleet or vehicles – management of the drivers – alongside their other roles. So what we have there is a challenge, where often the businesses that rely very much on these vehicles are being managed by somebody who hasn’t necessarily been given the formal training required or hasn’t got the time available to be able to properly and fully understand the implications.

 

What I wanted to do was created something intuitive and easy to engage with, and something relevant to the sector we were talking to. There’s been some fantastic work that’s been done previously, and I’ve seen information that can be associated with some very serious situations – the corporate manslaughter situations were, and still are, very prevalent – but it doesn’t apply necessarily to everyday events. And the challenge we wanted to create was something that every single business could easily experience.

 

Why with DfBB? Well, as you’ve already said Simon, I’m delighted with the work we’ve already done with you over so many years. And it seemed a really good fit working with you and creating something free-of-charge that was really a help to educate fleet operators – who, as I say, may not necessarily be trained. And maybe look at the sort of scenarios they might experience and identify perhaps the areas that they may not have initially thought about. So that was really at the heart of it – to provide an education tool that was free-of-charge and easily accessible to anyone who wanted it.

 

Simon: And it’s an interesting point, about the distinction between fatalities and injuries – obviously with the very big fleets in the country there is a statistical likelihood that they will have to deal with fatalities at some point, often more than one a year. But with the majority of companies with a small or medium-sized fleet, that’s possibly something they’ll never experience. The scenario we picked was about an injury collision with a cyclist, and we used that to our advantage with the mock trial, because there was a recent introduction of a new offence which is Causing Serious Injury by either Careless or Dangerous Driving, depending on the severity of the offence. And that makes it much more realistic to fleets, doesn’t it? Because according to government statistics, there’s about 40,000 a year of those.

 

Peter: Yeah, and I think that’s one of the important parts of it. When you look at the very small number of prosecutions for very, very serious accidents which escalate to the courts, if you look at serious injuries – I think, as you say, it’s in its thousands – but almost every business you talk to, even the smallest one, will have a driver running into the back of somebody at some stage, or reversing into a post, or maybe having a complaint from the general public. So we wanted to make it real, and as you say, I think the headline interests really were large corporate events and activities. But this is really designed to make it relevant to anyone, regardless of the size of the fleet they’re operating.

 

Simon: Obviously I’ve mentioned this mock trial presentation a couple of times now. It was at a 3-day Health and Safety Conference and we’ve got a video of that now available on the DfBB website, under the Events tab at the top – look for ‘Health and Safety Event 2023’ and you’ll find that there. But the purpose of that session, Peter, was to highlight the importance of accurate record keeping. So, why is that so important in your view?

 

Peter: What you have to be able to recognise is that you need to be able to demonstrate to the authorities that you are running a safe and legal fleet. So many of the businesses we talk to, and now almost a majority of those we support and help, are really reliant on spreadsheets, fragmented data that may be on whiteboards… a lot of what we try to do is to give companies that confidence that they can rely very much on remote access to data that’s a holistic view of what they’re trying to do, rather than looking at it in this fragmented way.

 

Often businesses we talk to have got leased vehicles with maintenance, and there’s a misconception within a lot of fleet operators that we talk to that because they lease these vehicles and maintenance is provided as part of the lease, that the leasing company themselves are responsible for record keeping. That they’re responsible for these vehicles being maintained correctly. And what we reinforce with them is that if something were to happen and they have a serious event with a vehicle that wasn’t properly maintained then it would be them in court, not the lease company. So, having records and having accurate information so that you can be confident you know what needs be done and when – you can only do that with a robust audit trail. And it should stand up. And if companies are investing in spreadsheets, and investment in time is where we’re looking at it, then you are massively exposed. Data could be deleted or easily corrected within that format.

 

Simon: Yeah, there are a couple of really important points to reinforce there. While you can delegate the management of that risk, i.e. the maintenance of the leased vehicles to the leasing company, you cannot delegate the ownership of the risk. The company always has the ownership and the responsibility to make sure that risk is managed. And it doesn’t matter what you did to manage that risk, what matters is that you can prove you did it, which is why record keeping is so important. So what are the key things that records need to be kept for? Those responsible for driver and vehicle safety, what should they be making sure that they accurately record?

 

Peter: Okay, really good question Simon. In fairness, the basis we start off with is get the essentials done first. It can sometimes feel like there is so much to do and they don’t know where to start. Our recommendation is exactly as you said – drivers and vehicles. Let’s focus on the fundamental requirements first. You should be confident that both the vehicles and their drivers are legal, and you can demonstrate that by appropriate record keeping.

 

So the areas that are prerequisite for drivers, for example, would be licence checking, medical records, training information – are they competent to drive the vehicle you’re putting them in? Incidents are something that happen so often that businesses are not recording information on. For example – a complaint from the general public. We had a scenario – I won’t say who – but it was a driver who was going the wrong way around a mini-roundabout in Swindon. And if anyone’s been to Swindon you will understand it is an experimental town with roundabouts. But this particular driver was going the wrong way and the general public sort of shouted at the driver and the driver and the driver flicked the v’s back in a sign written vehicle. To give you an example on that one, the pedestrian reported it and wrote to the directors, but he also copied Wiltshire Police in. Wiltshire Police arrived and wanted to know what the event was, if they had recorded it, and what actions had they taken on it.

 

And I think something as innocent as a complaint from the general public, or a speeding event, or a parking event, or reversing into a post… these things should be recorded. And looking at trends, a lot of businesses invest in telematics, and there can be frequent occurrences when you get speeding and things like that again. So, driver incidents and high-risk drivers are a key issue. Fitness to drive – are your drivers showing up to work fit to drive? This should be confirmed every time they’re in the vehicle.

 

The vehicle side – this is a big subject, and I’m only going to skirt over some of the areas, but you’ve got all the fundamental stuff. The road tax, the MOTs, the servicing. Probably the area that, as an engineer in my previous life… defect management is quite close to my heart. And if companies are – and a lot of businesses sadly aren’t – making sure the drivers are doing regular safety checks, it’s not just the inspections that the driver has done and defects there, the other area we do need to look at is advisory notifications coming through. So if you’re talking about recording information, it could be MOT records coming through, advisory notifications coming through from the garages letting you know the vehicle will need maintenance – maybe in 6 months’ time. But you combine that with some of the equipment fitted to vehicles, LOLER inspections, there’s a myriad of things across the board. So start off gently – get the basics first, but this really does illustrate what I said earlier about spreadsheets being an inadequate method of recording such an enormous range of data that’s required.

 

Simon: I’ve brought this up in a couple of conversations recently but an example that illustrates that very well is the Glasgow bin lorry incident where the driver had heart trouble while driving and crashed, killing a number of people. But Glasgow Council were exonerated of any blame because they were able to prove they’d done all the relevant checks and they had done everything reasonably practicable to ensure the driver and the vehicle were safe, so the driver was held fully responsible for that and his employer, by dint of their exceptional record keeping and procedures, were in the clear over that, which I think is what all of our audience would be hoping for.

 

Peter: Yes, but I think I said earlier, a smaller enterprise which doesn’t have the same level of infrastructure could easily have fallen foul and failed to have asked the appropriate questions or have the audit trail to prove that that’s being done. Fitness to drive, within our walkaround inspection app, is the very first thing that drivers have got to say before they actually drive the vehicle in the morning. Are you under the influence of alcohol or drugs? Are there any medical conditions that could impair you? So it’s not something they do once. They do it every single time they get in the vehicle.

 

Simon: When we did our mock trial presentation, the fictional company we presented in the court got a lot of things wrong. Where do you commonly see fleets make mistakes with record keeping?

 

Peter: Well as I said earlier, it is to do with defect management and how often there is a lot of focus on making sure the drivers are completing inspections on vehicles to prove there are nil defects on vehicles. This is so important – not to prove there’s nothing wrong with the vehicle, it’s so that when there is something wrong, it’s being identified and tracked through. We’ve unfortunately heard many cases before we get involved where drivers complained that they are regularly letting the office know that there is something wrong with the vehicle, but nobody actually takes any action on it. So it is a matter of getting this data and doing something with it. And ensuring that they can prove beyond any doubt that the vehicle is not only being maintained in accordance with the manufacturers service intervals, but also that the vehicle – especially now, because gone are the days when we could inspect a vehicle and be fairly confident that it would be maintained properly – now the onus and responsibility is very much on the operator of the vehicle, not the garage. With the extended service intervals of 2 years, 40,000 miles, it is the company’s responsibility to make sure the vehicle is legal.

 

The other area we do see companies fall foul on is licence checking. Often, they’ll be quite vigilant at the beginning when drivers first start, with the appropriate documentation to prove they can drive. This should be risk-based, and done on a regular basis – minimum once a year. If they have more points, then it should be done more frequently. But we do see companies often just assuming that they can just look at the plastic part of the licence and think they’re fit to drive. Or even just use their national insurance details and their driving licence number to go in and get the data from the DVLA. That is something no company should do. It’s a breach of the data protection and security areas on that so every company should be really careful to properly risk manage their drivers. It’s a criminal offence to drive a vehicle without a licence so it’s a fundamental requirement. That and managing defects are just two of the areas that I would highlight.

 

Simon: And managing defects – if you don’t deal with them, small defects can turn into larger defects quite quickly. We’ve obviously got the cost of living crisis and everything from vehicle repairs to fuel and insurance costs are going through the roof. So surely keeping proper track of fleet activity can make quite a significant contribution to cost control?

 

Peter: Absolutely. If you’re talking about a very common advisory – it would be that when brake pads themselves are getting low, failure to replace those on time means you’re going to have to buy new discs, new pads… the cost could be 3 or 4 times the amount, not taking into consideration the down time that brings. And the last forecast of that I saw averaged between £700-800, and I’ve seen many companies where there are multiple drivers and the cost of vehicles being off the road for a day can be much higher than that.

 

As far as the maintenance and management of that side is concerned… it’s preventative maintenance. I’m always going to be an advocate of this as an engineer. We are seeing vehicles being kept on fleet longer now than ever. There are critical events that need to be done – for example a cam belt is something that if you’ve only had a vehicle for 3 or 4 years and you’ve run it up to 80,000 or 100,000 miles this might be something that you’ve never experienced needing replacing but a cam belt failure, in a lot of cases you could write the vehicle off. So these are preventative maintenance issues but being proactive rather than reactive can substantially reduce the downtime, and if you are relying on vehicles staying on fleet now longer than in the past, you really do need to look at this very carefully. It’s really important.

 

Simon: Now, we often talk about fleet safety, and historically we’ve been talking to fleet managers – and a lot of them are responsible for driver safety, but a lot of them really only have responsibility for fleet as more of a procurement and maintenance role. And we’ve recently realised that a huge part of our audience are safety managers. Not fleet managers, but safety managers, and driver safety comes under their remit. And research shows that driver safety is consistently in the top 3 concerns for safety professionals at all levels. So, they understand the relevant legislation – the Health and Safety at Work Act – but they don’t always understand how driver safety fits into that. So, what would you think was the most important thing for them to focus on? They’re not fleet professionals but safety professionals with a responsibility for vehicles and drivers.

 

Peter: It’s a good question. And one that across all organisations we talk to is one of the biggest challenges. But it is communicating with drivers – that’s the number 1 thing businesses have got to do. If you look at the first step, it’s creating, communicating and monitoring your policy and making sure it is in circulation, that all of the drivers are confirming they’ve got it, receipts that they’ve got it. And any updates that are required to go through. So the focus on fleet is around what fleet managers are dealing with. And the single biggest challenge they’ve got is the drivers and what they’re doing. Telematics can play a part, but only one part. It doesn’t actually eliminate the responsibility – if anything it heightens that requirement to look at the data and act on it. It can be very useful to prove where people are at certain times – for example when then are events, an accident or something, it can exonerate the driver and prove that they weren’t responsible.

 

We talked already about safety checks, as far as the fundamental requirements – we’ve seen this a lot – because it’s difficult to do, a lot of businesses have a policy to say that vehicles should be inspected, but they don’t adhere to it, and the drivers don’t get chased, so they really condone it in that type of attitude. And if something awful happened, the drivers would say ‘I know I’ve agreed to this, but nobody asked me for it’, so it’s important to be constant. And if there are problems and people aren’t doing what they need to… and let’s be fair, everything to do with fleet management is common sense. The vehicles need to be legal – you cannot have a vehicle with tyres less than 1.6mm. We’d recommend less than 2mm. 3mm is a far safer option. These are common sense areas companies should look at. Can they all with confidence go out into a car park and look at every vehicle they’ve got – and often the tyre companies come and do an audit for you – and to prove whether or not the vehicles have got legal tyres on them. And I think about 60% of the tyres in tyre depots are replaced while they’re illegal. How many of those could affect organisations that you’re talking to now?

 

But I would finish it with one of the biggest problems we see – although communication is absolutely imperative – you have to have senior management buy in and recognise the importance so there is that authority, that push. So when there are drivers not adhering to what they should be doing because it’s getting the job done rather than making sure the vehicle is safe, senior management should be supporting fleet managers or safety managers to give that strength there to make sure there is adherence to it.

 

Simon: My final question Peter is this – at the top of the discussion, in the first question, we were talking about how common it is for people to manage fleet activity and safety on spreadsheets and paper bases and filing systems. What are the main benefits that come from using a proper integrated fleet management software solution over those traditional paper-based systems?

 

Peter: I often refer to what’s happened in the world of accountancy. If you look 15 or 20 years ago, they were bookkeepers. They were manually keeping records, and this was very labour intensive. Nowadays, HMRC have mandated that you have got to submit returns electronically, and we’re seeing a trend now towards this in the fleet industry. And really, we would expect to see within 5 or 10 years that this will be the norm. If you are submitting defects, or operating HGVs and on the Earned Recognition Scheme… as a prerequisite for that from the DVSA, you have to submit electronic record keeping and prove that the vehicles are being inspected correctly, MOTs are being carried out correctly, and the failure rates are appropriate. And you have to make sure that the vehicles themselves are checked for safety.

 

So I think it’s an inevitability. We’ve seen it in some respects where the road tax has been removed from screens many years ago now. Driving licence paper mandates and MOT records being computerised. So I think it’s an inevitability, digitalising data. Why? Well, you can look at, for example, fuel analysis – an area we often work with businesses on that maybe spend two days a month pulling all the data across to try and prove what the consumption figures are – which we would definitely recommend everyone does. We can do that for them in a 5-minute report. So we can save two days’ work.

 

So there are massive benefits in time saving. I’ve not yet met anyone who’s operating fleets who wouldn’t agree that time is one of the single biggest challenges they have. Also, we’ve talked about this, the cost of fleet – it’s the second largest overhead outside of payroll, often. Putting controls into that… accurate record keeping means you can start running meaningful reports and look at where savings can be made. We’ve talked about vehicles running for a longer period of time nowadays – so even more time and effort needs to be put in to look at which of those vehicles should stay on fleet, which ones shouldn’t.

 

But at the heart of what we’re talking about today is the awareness and duty of care and Health and Safety implications. And what we do see in the hundreds of companies and thousands of vehicles we manage is this peace of mind that you have when all of your information is in a central database, accessible remotely. And assurance that if anything happens, that you can very, very quickly verify what’s been done and when it’s been done. So peace of mind, time saving, and cost savings are the three main benefits that you get from the investment. And the return on that investment is very, very easy to show. But fundamentally there is a legal requirement to manage your vehicles correctly. And I think from my side, often vehicles now are equipped with very high standards of equipment – cameras, telematics… so the vehicles themselves are with all the right safety measures.

 

Really, you should be giving the person whose job it is to manage those vehicles the tools to do it. And that’s really what we do.

 

Simon: Fantastic. I would agree whole-heartedly with all of that. I’ll put some links to resources in the show notes for this episode. FleetCheck and Driving for Better Business collaborated on the Gap Analysis which you can find on the DfBB website – I’ll put a link to that. I’ll also put a link to the Fleet Confidence Course, FleetCheck’s free online introductory course. And as part of that, Peter you mentioned that one of the first key points was getting your Driving for Work policy written and communicated to drivers, and there’s a free, fully editable Driving for Work policy as part of that Fleet Confidence Course, so that could be interesting there. But Peter, thank you very much for your time today.

 

Peter: Thank you very much for inviting me.

 

___________________________________________________________________

 

Simon: If you manage drivers and their vehicles, and you face similar issues to those discussed in this podcast, there are links in the show notes to some useful resources on the Driving for Better Business website. And these are all free to access. If you enjoyed the conversation, please don't forget to hit subscribe - so you know when the next episode is released - and please also give us a 5 star review as this helps us to get up the podcast rankings and makes it more visible to others who might also find it useful. You can follow us - that's @DrivingforBetterBusiness on Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn, and most importantly, please help us to spread the word. All our resources are free for those who manage fleets, and their employees who drive for work. Thank you for listening to Let's Talk Fleet Risk, and I look forward to welcoming you to the next episode.

Careless & dangerous driving - what does a prosecution look like for employers?

Simon: Welcome to Let’s Talk Fleet Risk – a podcast for those who manage drivers and their vehicles, and want to reduce road risk in their organisation.

 

My guest this month is a legal expert in the field of transport and regulatory law. It’s Chris Green, who is a partner at law firm Keoghs. Welcome to the podcast, Chris.

 

Chris: Hello, Simon. How are you?

Simon: Very well thank you. Now, I’ve asked Chris onto the show because we’re partnering with Keogh’s to present a mock trial prosecution of a van operator at this year’s Health and Safety event at the NEC later this month. The mock trial presentation will be on Wednesday 26^th April in DfBB’s own Driver Safety Theatre – and I’ll give out full details at the end of the podcast.

Now Chris, I don’t want to give the game away as to what happens during this prosecution, but I do want to give a preview of the scenario and then discuss in some broad terms some of the issues that we’re going to be looking at in the presentation.

So, the scenario – roughly speaking – is that a van driver struck a cyclist shortly after starting a morning shift. And it’s a serious incident, with the cyclist taken to hospital and he’s in a pretty bad way – the police have classed his condition as critical. The police would then obviously conduct a roadside investigation to find out what had happened and to find out whether the driver was at fault – what might have happened that had gone wrong. So what would they be looking for in that investigation?

Chris: A couple of things. In the first instance they would have Forensics and Scenes of Crimes Officers present, to see – for example – where there were broken fragments from the car, and to indicate where the collision had taken place. So that might assist in terms of the position of each vehicle in the road, or to gather witness statements from those who were present. These days we see a lot of this is covered by dashcam footage or other CCTV – so that element of the job, many years ago when I started, I’m afraid has gone out of it. So that’s all done for us on a very high-tech, automated level these days. They would be interviewing the driver at the scene and checking suspected drugs or alcohol issues. They’d be asking to see the mobile phone records and potentially seizing it as well. And in addition to that they would be trying to obtain accounts from anybody present and to check the welfare of anybody injured in the collision, including the driver and anybody else as well.

So there’s a number of things they would be doing, and then of course the investigation would carry on afterwards where they would begin the interview process.

Simon: What about the state of the vehicle? How much attention would they give to the roadworthiness of the vehicle at that point?

Chris: It’s absolutely critical, because if there were any suggestion that there were mechanical failure that was either outside of the control of the driver, or something that had manifested itself between the time they started the journey and the time of the crash, then they’ve got to at least explore that possibility before they can decide how blameworthy the driver was. Occasionally I’m afraid, there are still cases that we deal with where there are examples where the vehicle just wasn’t in a serviceable condition, and on that basis it’s a different scenario in terms of trying to establish guilt.

Simon: So, we know that in law the driver is usually responsible for ensuring that the vehicle is safe and that they drive within the highway code. So, what potentially could lead the collision investigators to look beyond the driver and at the employer?

Chris: Well, the employer has still got a duty to protect both the employee who’s driving the car and anybody else who might be affected by that. And in addition to that, any employees who may be carried in the vehicle at the same time as the driver. So, that obligation is actually quite wide. If, for example, there were any suggestion that the employer wasn’t carrying out either mechanical inspections, or didn’t have a policy on the use of mobile phones, drugs and alcohol, eyesight, and these sort of issues, and monitoring the hours that the driver was working… then these days, those are all aspects that the police can and will be looking for. Because there is the potential to bring in the employer as well.

Simon: You mentioned policy there, so let’s delve a little deeper into that. Whenever I’ve seen prosecutions like this in the press, normally reported where there’s are a fatality, they seem to hinge around policy. And those that are found guilty have either failed to implement or failed to follow and establish policy, whereas employers that are found not guilty were generally able to prove that they did have the right policies in place, and that they were rigorously followed and monitored. So, what typical examples do you see of poor practice from a policy point of view, and more importantly what impact would this have on their case in court?

Chris: The thing is with prosecutors, sometimes I wonder whether my opponent is believing that the very fact that an accident has taken place is evidence of the breach. So in other words, you couldn’t have had an accident if all was complied with, and that in itself generates the suspicion that they’re negligent. I’m not sure it’s quite like that, but take for example a case I had recently where it was a company which was really loath to be amending their mobile phone policy. We sat down and, once we’d really spent some time to consider whether the mobile phones were actually necessary in the business, through gritted teeth some people had to concede that actually they probably didn’t need it. So, really, the answer to your question is that they’ve got to be really clear on the test of reasonably practicable. And there is a balance to be struck between the cost and the time and the inconvenience on one side of things – in terms of implementing further measures – and on the other, the risk involved.

So, if that is balanced for example against a serious or fatal incident, then the bar is set quite high. And I think in the first instance, a court and a police prosecutor might want to prove that they’ve actually considered all of the right factors. They’ve then, as you say, got to implement anything that comes out of that process, and then critically, to follow it on the road as well. So it is quite an onerous duty, but whenever things go wrong, with reverse engineering, they would be looking to see whether that’s all been done as it should have been.

Simon: Now, we’re going to be prosecuting a company in our mock trial presentation, so, it’s a fictitious incident obviously but the investigation in this case must have obviously raised some serious concerns about the way the company managed driver safety. And you mentioned a couple of things there that a policy needs to include – mobile phones, driver fatigue, that kind of thing – there are other things as well like driver checks, vehicle defect reporting, that kind of thing. These are all things that should be included in a policy, so how would you expect companies to manage these things and what impact does managing it poorly have in a prosecution?

Chris: Well, the onus is on them. The balance of probabilities there that they would need to demonstrate – i.e. it’s more likely than not that they comply – but the key point is the onus is actually on the company to prove they’re innocent rather than the other way around. So, if I’m prosecuting Health and Safety offences, all I need to show is that the individual was an employee – well that’s usually straightforward, that the company employs people – and that there had been an accident. So, as soon as I’ve established those two factors as a prosecutor, then the onus shifts to the defendant – in this case the company – and they would need to prove they’d done everything they reasonably could, and there’s law on that that suggests that that’s got to be not only in disproportion, but it’s arguably got to be grossly disproportionate, and it’s only those things that you’re entitled not to do as a company.

If roughly the time and the expense involved in putting that measure in place doesn’t look totally out of kilter with the risk of a serious or fatal accident, then really the onus is on you to take that step, or at least explain – having gone through the assessment process – why you don’t think it’s practical. So, be it on your head, and then – as you say – it’s then got to be followed through by the individuals out on the road.

Simon: So, the onus in on the employer to prove that they’re innocent. That would suggest that record-keeping is pretty important, yes?

Chris: Well it would. It’s really sad in my line of work where it’s quite clear that a company has good processes and the custom of practice is that it’s usually followed by people. But of course, many times where there has been a fatal accident, the absence just of one document ironically could be the one that would prove that the measure the company needed to demonstrate it had taken – there’s just no evidence on the point. So, some HSE inspectors say to me that the absence of evidence is evidence of absence – so if it’s not documented it didn’t exist. So, I’m afraid it won’t be the first time a lawyer’s said this, but the key point behind what you’ve said is that you don’t just need to take the step, you need a mechanism to gather and collate and keep the proof of that as well, else it does leave you fairly vulnerable as I’m sure we might see at the trial.

Simon: It’s not just proving that you’ve done something, you’ve implemented a step or a policy now I guess, is it. Because, a key part of this is ensuring that you monitor compliance of that step or policy or procedure – whatever it is. And that you prove you take appropriate action if people are found to be cutting corners or routinely missing those steps out – whether it’s a vehicle check, for instance, and that’s not getting done. So it’s as important to monitor compliance and take appropriate action in the event of non-compliance as it is to put that step in place as well, I guess isn’t it?

Chris: That’s right. There has to come a point where the company has done all it can reasonably could and I think relying on good common sense will go a long way in that. If you’ve got drivers, for example, who are just routinely signing documents to say that something’s happened when it clearly hasn’t, then really the onus is on them – that’s a false statement. Equally, however, it is important that there is some supervisory mechanism in place and that checks are undertaken to establish the procedures are being followed as they should be. But again, sadly, practice tells that it is quite common after some of these incidents that the individual driver who may not have followed the policy may not be the only one who hasn’t followed the policy, or you can’t prove that the other have as well.

So you can see how that would play out, and this is where prosecutors perhaps start getting a bit of an inkling that there is a bigger problem, a more widespread failing as part of the company’s obligations.

Simon: My final question I think here Chris is to ask you about what offences we would typically be looking at here. Years ago there was a great big focus on corporate manslaughter for instance, but my understanding is that’s a difficult thing to prove. I’m not aware of any prosecutions – successful prosecutions – under that. But, what offences would we be looking at and what would be the legislation that those would fall under?

Chris: Sure, well if we looked outside out window on any given day, I dare say we’d probably all conclude that there are examples of driving that falls into the first category which is ‘Careless Driving’ – failure to meet the standards of the reasonably prudent and competent driver, in a way that would be obvious to the reasonable, prudent and competent driver. So that isn’t a very high bar to overcome. Clearly if we prosecuted all of those then the criminal justice system would grind to a halt in no time at all.

Where there is a serious injury involved, then clearly the resources that the Police and the Crown Prosecution Service would devote to the case right from the outset are that much higher. So the second category would be ‘Causing Serious Injury by Careless Driving’, so you’re very much really bound by the consequences rather than necessarily the standard of the driving. As we go up the scale of seriousness, if the serious injury has been caused by dangerous driving – so it’s what I’ve just said there but it’s falling far below those standards, rather than just below those standards – then you can go further up the scale depending on the injury and the standard of the driving.

So at the very top end of the scale, as far as those categories are concerned, would then be causing death – if for whatever reason there is a fatality involved, and the injured party doesn’t make it through – then ‘Causing Death by Careless or Dangerous Driving’ would actually be another offence, and carry a serious penalty.

You’re right as far as manslaughter and corporate manslaughter goes, it’s rare. What I can tell you is that the Health and Safety Executive are looking for cases with big, well-known defendants and corporate entities, or entities with deep pockets. So really the key from this end is that you have been warned. So there are a range of offences available to any prosecutor.

Simon: And so, our audience for the mock trial… it’s at the Health and Safety Event, so our audience largely is Health and Safety professionals who would be very familiar with the Health and Safety at Work Act, and the Management of Health and Safety Regulations. Would offences get prosecuted under that?

Chris: They can do. What we often see is that there might be a prosecution of the driver, alongside that of the company. Sometimes I wonder whether it’s put on a little bit of a plea bargain to try and exact a guilty plea out of the company, in exchange for a better deal for the driver, but that’s a maybe. Wherever there is evidence that something that the company has done is either widespread and a failing, and/or usually has actually played in the part in the injury and in the poor driving, then prosecutors will not be afraid at all to bring the company in as well.

So, straight away you see that anything mechanical would be an issue for the company rather than the driver. But it does go wider than that, as we said. So mobile phone policies, eyesight, hours, fatigue, drugs and alcohol, and one or two more. These days we’ve seen a bit of a change in how the prosecutors are viewing these, right from day one. And unashamedly they’re looking for corporate liability as well as the driver.

Simon: What’s the likely punishment for a company if it was prosecuted under the Health and Safety at Work Act?

Chris: Well this is the difficulty we often find – that even Health and Safety professionals who perhaps are more used to the idea of a workplace accident would not necessarily link in the possibility that a road traffic accident would be dealt with in the same way, because of course they’re usually dealt with by the police; there’s an agreement in place between them and the HSE. But wherever the incident looks as if it might be work-related, or there is something in the background, the problem for them is that it’s actually dealt with under the same guidelines as it would be for any other Health and Safety offence. That’s where you’re getting into the realms of turnover-based fines, and that’s where I’m afraid we have seen some of the fines going into the millions for big, well-known companies with large turnovers.

Simon: And just a final point on that, then. Obviously, those were corporate responsibilities, but the Health and Safety at Work Act has provision for prosecuting individuals, where they haven’t either put the right policies in place, or they failed to follow what was an established safety policy and that’s resulted in someone getting injured, or potentially killed. So there’s scope within the Health and Safety at Work Act for prosecuting individuals and the punishments for those can be quite severe as well, can’t they?

Chris: They can. Under Section 37, senior-ish managers who are part of the company’s strategic brain, if you will, that have a say over what the company does and how it does it… if they’ve personally involved in this, or turned blind eyes, don’t have a policy, know it’s not being followed, or worse still, contributed to the commission of the offence, then they too can be held personally liable. Again, it often comes as a surprise to a few people that those are imprisonable. They can be 2 years in prison in very, very serious cases – and they are rare – but that power is out there already.

Simon: Fantastic. Ok, Chris, thank you so much for sharing your insight with that. Hopefully that’s given our audience a taster, or encouraged them to see how that mock trial prosecution plays out when we enact that later on this month. Where can people get hold of you Chris if they’d like some advice from you professionaly?

Chris: The email address is cbgreen@keoghs.co.uk. But if they’re on LinkedIn, or some of the other social media, the firm is Keogh’s. Very happy to help, and any one of the team will be familiar with this, whatever part of the country you’re in.

Simon: Brilliant, well I’ll put all of those links in the show notes and also to the Health and Safety Event. It runs from Tuesday 25^th to Thursday 27^th of April, and the mock trial presentation will be starting at 11am on the second day – Wednesday 26^th April. It’s in the Driver Safety Theatre, which is part of the Health and Safety Event in Hall 3 at the NEC. We’ll be looking at good practice, and the consequences of poor practice, and there will also be some packs for our audience to take away as well. Chris, if you could give us one thing that you think would be really important for people to come and see and take away from that, what would you say?

Chris: When you see how these cases pan out in court – we’ll try and make this as realistic as we possibly can in the time that we have – the bit that people often say to us is “I didn’t realise it was like that”. And the other comment is usually really when something is tested at that level of scrutiny, as you would employ a lawyer to do, often your answers do not survive the evidence. And seeing it in this very graphic way I think is very helpful because it will send a message out to those who might need a bit of a refresher back at base.

Simon: Brilliant. Well in addition to the mock trial, there’s a packed agenda in that theatre as well – we’ve got three days of content, panel discussions, examples of good practice. We’ve published a full agenda on the Driving for Better Business website, at drivingforbetterbusiness.com/events, and hopefully we’ll see some of you there. So Chris, thank you again, and I’ll see you in a couple of weeks at the NEC.

 

 

***********************

 

Simon: If you manage drivers and their vehicles, and you face similar issues to

those discussed in this podcast, there are links in the show notes to some useful

resources on the Driving for Better Business website. And these are all free to

access. If you enjoyed the conversation, please don’t forget to hit subscribe - so you

know when the next episode is released. And please also give us a 5-star review, as

this helps us to get up the podcast rankings, and makes it more visible to others who

might also find it useful. You can follow us – that’s Driving for Better Business on

Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn. And most importantly, please help us to spread the

word. All our resources are free for those who manage fleets and their employees

who drive for work. Thank you for listening to Let’s Talk Fleet Risk, and I look forward

to welcoming you to the next episode.

Commercial Drivers - driver behaviour, improving driver coping strategies

My guest this week is someone whom many of you may have seen

 

Welcome to the podcast Lisa.

Lisa: Thank you. Thank you for inviting me.

Simon: So, Lisa, you’re an Associate Professor of Driving Behaviour and Director of the Driving Research Group at Cranfield University. You previously founded companies like DriverMetrics, you were co-founder of The Floow. But you’ve now founded a new company called PsyDrive – all of which were to, kind of, commercialise some of the valuable research that you’ve done and make those learnings available to fleet operators. So, perhaps you could start by telling us a little bit about what you’re working on at the moment.

Lisa: Sure. So, with Cranfield, some of the work I’m doing right now is looking at behavioural adaptation in response to autonomous vehicles. And so, we’re running a series of studies in the field, looking at how people change their behaviour in response to automated systems over time. A lot of people think that driverless vehicles are going to be safer, but I think there are some things that we really need to understand a bit more about first.

So that’s my work with Cranfield. And then, with PsyDrive I essentially developed an accredited CPD course on Human Factors in driving, which is available for fleet managers and anybody working in the fleet industry really, to help them understand a bit more about driver behaviour.

Simon: Excellent. Now, this episode of our podcast is part of a range of content we’ve created this quarter around the theme of fitness to drive – which obviously covers physical and mental health, fatigue, wellbeing etc. – and so I wanted to start with an overview of the general demands of driving for work on the driver. We’re focusing generally on commercial vehicle drivers – so vans and trucks – and those drivers are probably doing reasonably high mileages across the year. So I was wondering if you could talk to us a little bit about what the general demands are for those of us who are largely office based and probably wouldn’t be aware of the demands on a commercial vehicle driver out there all day.

 

Lisa: Yeah, and that’s an important distinction, because a lot of people who are not driving for work really don’t understand some of the problems of actually driving a truck or a van, and some of the demands that drivers have. Often professional drivers complain about how the road users get in their way, and make things a bit more difficult for them because they don’t really understand things like turning circles, just being able to get around a corner and how they need to be considerate of what a big truck needs. So, yeah, there are a lot of stresses on professional drivers – not only just the type of vehicle that they’re driving, but also the nature of the work. What it is they have to do during the day. Some of the professional drivers have multi-drop kind of activities, others are long-haul, short-haul… it all varies. And they have to engage with customers and these are often quite stressful situations, especially if they’re running late. Management, supervisory practices… and of course there are a lot of issues around the traffic, and having to get through traffic to a tight schedule.

 

Simon: So I guess the main pressures sort of revolve around workload and time pressure. I often describe these when I’m talking to fleet operators, or warn them against creating unrealistic work schedules where it often doesn’t seem possible to make all of those deliveries, or all of those service visits within the expected time, without the driver having to speed or take other risks. So what does that kind of pressure… what sort of impact does that have on the drivers?

 

Lisa: Yeah. So, all drivers at some time or other will suffer from driver stress just because of the nature of driving these days. Traffic’s actually moving slower every year, so there are just general demands of the task itself. The work involved in manoeuvring a vehicle is actually quite resource intensive. And so, it can be quite high on workload. For example, the road environment itself represents quite a high workload – for example, if there’s poor visibility, or poor road markings or road surfaces. These are all things that professional drivers have to negotiate their way through, and it adds to the workload. And then, if they’re on a difficult route, or they’re having to perform difficult manoeuvres – perhaps having to park in very restricted areas… they also have a lot of different tasks to do at the same time. You know, thinking about work. And these kinds of situations mean that there are quite large fluctuations in the demands placed on professional drivers during the day.

So, the impact really can have a very negative impact on things like blood pressure and stress hormones – the research is… there are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of studies to show how driver stress can impact on these physiological measures.

 

Simon: Now, I know a lot of us talk to our delivery drivers when they turn up at home to gauge what kind of pressures they’re under. And following on from that last point, not only is excessive workload and time pressure really hard for them to cope with at times, but then many of them have their routes planned down to the very last minute. And so, if they encounter roadworks or congestion – those unexpected delays and diversions can probably really compound that, can’t they?

 

Lisa: Yes, that’s right. Whenever driving is externally paced and not self-paced, it becomes a demand. So professional drivers, delivery drivers, they often have performance targets to achieve. And, you know, if they’re being held up for whatever reason, then there are going to be impacts on the way in which they feel and how they tend to behave. So, for example, they’ll tend to get more irritable, more frustrated, more aggressive. And really develop quite an unpleasant, angry mood in some cases. And that can be quite difficult to deal with as another road user, when you see this quite hostile delivery van driver trying to get past you. And yeah, these are some of the everyday experiences that professional drivers have to go through I’m afraid.

 

Simon: Many drivers work odd hours, as well. Some of them have very long days, some of them are doing shift patterns, unsociable hours. And I know that one or two long days will do me in. Probably the same for most of us. So, how does that consistent, day-in day-out, long hours and unsociable hours – how does that impact on their general wellbeing?

 

Lisa: Yeah, there are very strong cumulative effects of fatigue, for example. The sort of, general wear-and-tear of doing this kind of job day-in, day-out, can have quite a terrible impact on their health. One of the first things that often goes when people are stressed is that they sleep quite badly – they can’t relax when they get home after work, they can’t switch off and have a good night’s sleep. And then, of course, stress itself is fatiguing. Because you’re operating the system at a very high spec, if you like. You’re trying to cope with all of these demands and that’s really quite fatiguing. So, yeah, there’s a general impact on wellbeing, such that there can be some really negative impacts on health.

 

Simon: And, it can sort of feed on itself, can’t it, then? Because if you’re taking stress from work home, and that’s causing you to sleep badly, you could have other areas where you’re bringing the pressures of home to work. Cases like those who have got a new baby in the house, or maybe have got financial worries, or other things. You’re bringing pressures to work, and the pressures of work are compounding it and going back home, and it just gets progressively worse.

 

Lisa: That’s right, and recently I’ve been looking into Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, which sounds like it’s a clinical condition that not many people have but, in fact, it mostly goes undiagnosed. And that’s a classic case of the chronic exposure to stress that can build up.

Let’s say, for example, you’ve had some very bad news at home, perhaps a close family member or friend has been diagnosed with a terminal illness or something of that nature. And then you have to go into this work environment where it’s quite stressful. It’s difficult because you’re going to be distracted by what’s going on at home and bring that into the work environment as a driver.

 

Simon: Yeah. I did a recent podcast on the increasing problem of drug driving, and how the police in many areas are now catching more drug drivers than alcohol. And actually, a lot of those turned out to be – in some cases, sort of half the offenders – turned out to be commercial vehicle drivers. So where we’ve got drivers experiencing these pressures, presumably quite a few of them are turning to drink and drugs as coping mechanisms for that stress. Which again, similar to the cycle of pressures building up between home and work, it’s a further destructive downward spiral, isn’t it?

 

Lisa: That’s right, and yeah, obviously these rather unhealthy coping strategies that commercial drivers might turn to – it’s sort of like a quick fix, if you like, to get you out of that state at that moment. You know, have a drink, have some kind of drug that would actually make you feel better. But, it is a destructive downward spiral because eventually, that will reduce your ability to actually handle stress in the long-term.

There are far better coping strategies that can be used to kind of offset the sedentary lifestyle nature of driving for work. Often we see that there are issues around diet and smoking as well as drugs and alcohol. So it’s about opening up other kinds of coping strategies that are much more effective.

 

Simon: Yeah, you mentioned diet and sedentary lifestyle there. And obviously, being a van driver or a commercial vehicle driver, you’re pretty much sat down for the vast majority of the day. Little exercise, unless you’re a multi-drop driver then you might get a bit of exercise. But the diet thing is really bad, isn’t it? And one of the things I’ve heard anecdotally, talking to our delivery drivers and others as well is dehydration, and the problem that can bring to the ability to make the right decisions. Because their work schedules are often so tightly controlled that they don’t get time for a comfort break, so consequently, a lot of them won’t drink enough water during the day because they haven’t got the time to then stop for a break later on. So what kind of effect does that have on their ability to make the right decisions when they’re on the road?

 

Lisa: Well these are some of the problems that are out there. And essentially, there’s only so much that the driver can do. It really is down to the employer in many situations to make sure that these rest breaks are built in, and there is support for drivers if they want to pursue a more healthy lifestyle – perhaps access to a gym, or there’s some kind of help with giving up on smoking, and eating better. There’s all sorts that’s actually possible.

Because, one of the things that we’ve talked about is how these coping strategies actually have a very poor impact on health in the long run. And it’s not surprising that truck drivers in particular are known for having much higher risk of developing chronic diseases. And that in itself has an impact on crash risk.

 

Simon: Let’s talk about crash risk, then. We’ve talked about a lot of the things that affect a driver’s wellbeing. What do driver managers need to understand about the effect that all of these have on the long-term health and the likelihood of their drivers being involved in incidents?

 

Lisa: So, there’s a kind of potentially immediate impact of some of the coping strategies that people used. So, if, for example, drivers took a brisk walk during a break, that would have a much stronger impact on their mood and their ability to perform at a higher level than just sitting around having a coffee, or a carb-high snack.

But if there’s some support that employers can offer, then you’ve got the chance of being able to improve the immune system’s ability to cope with diseases and problems that they can encounter. And we know, for example, that drivers with cardiovascular disease are twice as likely to have a crash and be at fault for that crash, compared with a healthier driver. And we know that there are several studies showing how people involved in crashes with chronic diseases are much more likely to see a fatal outcome. So, there are some very strong reasons why it’s important to manage stress when driving for work.

 

Simon: Do you know why that is? Why there’s that increase in risk if you’ve got a disease – is it people worrying about the disease? Is it symptoms while they’re driving? What’s causing it?

 

Lisa: It could be a number of things. Certainly, it could affect your ability to process information. If you have a cardiovascular disease, then your information processing capacity could be reduced which might affect your ability to check for hazards and respond appropriately. So, there are a number of reasons why that might be. It could be muscular-skeletal as well, it could be something to do with how well you’re able to manoeuvre. A lot of issues for truck drivers I’m afraid is being slightly overweight – and that can impact on their ability to look around the cab, in the manner that they should before making their manoeuvre.

 

Simon: Okay, so let’s come around to solutions, then. Now, you and I have met many times at safety conferences and the one thing that’s always struck me when you’ve been speaking is the importance that you put on evidence-led interventions. So, what would your advice be to managers about how to identify and manage driver stress effectively?

 

Lisa: Well this is an interesting one, because one of the issues around stress when driving for work is that people generally don’t say how they feel. For obvious reasons, because if they were to say to their manager, “I’m feeling really stressed, I didn’t sleep last night, I’m really worried about this”, they might not be able to work. And they need the work. It would just add to their stress if they were told that they have to go home and not work today. So, self-report for stress is not always reliable. So, I’m a big advocate of immunising the workforce, if you like, and making sure that everybody has some stress management strategies under their belt.

And that’s not to say that it’s all the driver’s responsibility, because there are many organisational factors that can impact on driver stress. I think companies should do whatever they can do to reduce stress at the top-level down. But, from the driver’s perspective, there are ways in which you can reduce distracted driving. And there is an evidence base around this. Essentially, what we’re doing within PsyDrive is to deliver progressive relaxation techniques to improve driver anger and aggression.

Because what you’re trying to get to is for drivers to adopt a more adaptive approach to driving, than a reactive one. Because if they’re adapting to whatever comes their way, in a kind of accepting manner, rather than a rejecting one and reacting to whatever’s going on around them – here you’re going to see some of the behaviours that we’ve talked about – you’re going to see the irritability, the close-following, the speeding, and all the kinds of behaviours that tend to lead to crashes.

Simon: You mentioned there about obviously drivers not being forthcoming about stress, because they need the work and they might get sent home or whatever. But the employer’s kind of treading a fine line as well, isn’t it – between what they should do, which is taking more account of this and trying to put their drivers under less stress, or if a driver does come in with stress, they’re able to say “we don’t want you out on the road if you’re feeling like that”. They’re working to such tight deadlines and thin margins, the employer probably feels like they can’t do that anyway, and they don’t actually want to know about the driver’s stress because it causes them too much disruption with trying to make other arrangements for deliveries.

So any thoughts on how employers can make that decision a little bit easier for them, or not put them in such a difficult situation?

 

Lisa: Well, there are strong individual differences in how people respond to stress, and that’s well known. It’s essentially about how you appraise the stressful situation, and retraining the thought processes around that is essential if you’re going to get people to be a bit more hardy. But from a management perspective, as I say, the best thing really is for everybody to have some form of stress management training, because it’s not going to do anyone any harm. It’s going to do an awful lot of good especially for certain people.

We know that there’s a subset of the workforce that are much more likely to be involved in crashes than others. And it could be that just by changing the way that they approach the problem of the demand on them as a driver, it could actually make all the difference. And also help drivers to talk about some of the things that are going on in their own lives. And how that can be resolved. Sometimes, just talking about it is very helpful.

 

Simon: Yeah, I want to ask you a final question, which is possible a little bit linked to what you said you were working on at the moment with Cranfield, looking into driver behaviour linked to autonomous vehicles and all of that. I know that’s some way in the future, but, in the intervening period we’ve got increasing levels of active drive safety technology, we’ve got various bits of technology on electric vehicles, obviously there’s an increasing number of electric vans on the road. And many of them have got a lot of this safety technology on there. Are there any considerations for driver managers about how those drivers adapt to all this new technology and the new driving style needed for an electric van – it’s obviously got different driving characteristics. Are there any things driver managers need to be aware of from a training… or how the driver feels comfortable with that technology?

 

Lisa: Well, yes, I think there’s an awful lot more that needs to be considered here, because in my experience… employers will often procure vehicles because the manufacturer is trying to sell the latest spec, but actually it’s a question of how people respond to that technology. And there’s an awful lot of evidence coming through around how reaction times might change, or behaviour might adapt in such a way that actually the safety benefits that they claim can’t be found. We’re currently looking at some of the claims that manufacturers are making about things like ESC or AC, adaptive cruise control. And we are seeing that these crashes that they’re supposed to be saving, is not actually possible really, because every system is claiming to reduce crashes by 50% and if that was the case we’d be having minus thousands of crashes every year.

 

Simon: Yeah, there’s a lot of work to do on that, making sure people understand the technology. The vast majority of drivers I’ve talked to don’t know what half of this technology is or does. So a lot of education still needs to be done on that.

Lisa, thank you so much for sharing your insight with us. Where can people go to find out more about you and your work?

 

Lisa: PsyDriveGroup.co.uk

 

Simon: Fantastic, okay, we’ll put a link to that in the show notes for this episode. Thanks very much, really appreciate your time.

 

Lisa: You too, thanks very much.

 

 

***********************

 

(transition)

 

Simon: If you manage drivers and their vehicles, and you face similar issues to

those discussed in this podcast, there are links in the show notes to some useful

resources on the Driving for Better Business website. And these are all free to

access. If you enjoyed the conversation, please don’t forget to hit subscribe - so you

know when the next episode is released. And please also give us a 5-star review, as

this helps us to get up the podcast rankings, and makes it more visible to others who

might also find it useful. You can follow us – that’s Driving for Better Business on

Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn. And most importantly, please help us to spread the

word. All our resources are free for those who manage fleets and their employees

who drive for work. Thank you for listening to Let’s Talk Fleet Risk, and I look forward

to welcoming you to the next episode.

Driver Fitness – What If Your Drivers’ Jobs Were Good for Them?

Show notes: Driver Fitness – What If Your Drivers’ Jobs Were Good for Them?

In the first quarter of this year, the Driving for Better Business campaign is taking a deeper look at the area of fitness to drive and driver wellbeing.

This month, we’ve published a revised risk management case study for WJ Group – one of the UK’s leading road safety and highway maintenance businesses. With over 650 employees and a fleet of more than 400 vehicles, driver wellbeing is a big focus for WJ.

My guest today in WJ Goup’s Sustainability Director Paul Aldridge, and we’re going to talk about how WJ Group mitigates the effects of what is a physically and mentally demanding job role, on it’s staff. Especially those who also drive the company vehicles.

Paul Aldridge, WJ Group Sustainability Director

https://www.drivingforbetterbusiness.com/podcast/episode/what-if-your-drivers-jobs-were-good-for-them

 

Useful Links

Paul Aldridge, WJ Group Sustainability Director
https://www.linkedin.com/in/paul-aldridge-072608109/

WJ Group
https://www.wj.uk/

Driver Fitness – what if your drivers’ jobs were good for them?
https://www.drivingforbetterbusiness.com/articles/driver-fitness-what-if-your-drivers-jobs-were-good-for-them/

 

Simon: Welcome to the February episode of ‘Let’s Talk Fleet Risk’

In the first quarter of this year, the Driving for Better Business campaign is taking a deeper look at the area of fitness to drive and driver wellbeing.

This month, we’ve published a revised risk management case study for WJ Group – one of the UK’s leading road safety and highway maintenance businesses. With over 650 employees and a fleet of more than 400 vehicles, driver wellbeing is a big focus for WJ.

My guest today in WJ Goup’s Sustainability Director Paul Aldridge, and we’re going to talk about how WJ Group mitigates the effects of what is a physically and mentally demanding job role, on its staff. Especially those who also drive the company vehicles.

Paul – Welcome to the podcast.

My first question is obviously why wellbeing is so important to WJ? As a company, WJ seems to go further than most employers, so perhaps you could tell us about the challenges your staff and drivers face as part of their jobs, and what drives this commitment to their wellbeing?

Paul: Sure. Wellbeing is critical to most businesses, I believe. It’s about looking after the whole person, so we’ve got health and safety and wellbeing, and they fit into this group – it’s better for the company – better for productivity – and better for the people that work for us. What could be wrong with that?

Our people face a lot of hazards – we’re working in the middle of the roads putting lines down, and working with hot materials is one of our principal activities so it’s fundamental to what we do.  The obvious hazards are materials and the vehicular activity so it’s providing a safe space – that’s important . Over the last few years for everyone working in the public realm there seems to be increasing abuse that people have to face. It seems strange to me that somebody feels they have the right to shout and swear at the people that work for us. They’d feel weird if we walked into their offices and did it to them, but they feel they have the right to do it to our workers – it’s not good for general wellbeing. There are also wider problems – air pollution is a real big problem for us as a society and by the nature of our work we contribute to it. There’s the physical risk – muscular skeletal risk, and as I say, the hazards of working with hot materials. Some years ago we started looking at this and we looked at the idea of stealing the title from our work with Business in the community – what if your job was good for you? We divided wellbeing onto several pillars – physical wellbeing, mental wellbeing, financial wellbeing and social wellbeing and it all fits together in trying to provide a holistic wellbeing for our people.

Simon: I think that’s really important. I like the idea of the pillars, So, if we drill down into the physical one to start with – tell us about the impact of poor fitness and what you do to help them.

 

Paul: A lot of the work we do – and we can’t forget those who don’t work on the roads – it’s a physically demanding job – but there’s lots of manual handling problems. Do they lift properly? We have added issues around the heat of the materials. There’s a lot of driving – sitting in a driver’s seat – so designing things as ergonomically the best it can be. We design equipment fundamentally for safety but also so its easy to use. So there’s splashguards in place, height protection for the back of a vehicle. Interlocks so moving parts don’t get in the way. We ask our people to contribute to the design of the vehicles they use. We have an SOS system – safety automation – so people can communicate with the safety and design team on improvements they can see on the vehicles or their working environment to reduce risks. It helps them better able to do their job.

 

Simon: It’s ot physical strength is it – they’re out on the roads all day – difficult to maintain reasonable diet, stay hydrated that kind of thing?

 

Paul: It’s a really good point. I think, we didn’t think about these things back in the day. We tended to live on the food in the local garage – and there’s a lot of night work so it’s hard to maintain a good diet – but we try to give advice. In our driver’s handbook we have a section on nutrition. We do work on occupational health – the employees have medicals – people from 21 to 60 have a medical every 3 years and if you’re over 60 you have it annually. If you have a medical need we review it annually and part of the process is the nurse talks to people about their diet and it helps pick up any problems with health early. We do regular eyesight checks every 6 months. Everyone who drives a company vehicle has one. We had lots of people starting to wear glasses – it helps pick up residual problems like cataracts – it’s good for your life beyond work. I believe it should extend ito their whole wellness.

 

Simon: You obviously take this approach with all your operational staff but some of those are going to have to drive your vehicles between jobs and then back again at the end of a gruelling shift. You mentioned earlier some is carried out overnight. How do you deal with things like fatigue and ensure they’re still able to concentrate and do that safely?

 

Paul:  Fatigue is a big risk for us and others in our industry so we have a fatigue policy which is regularly updated. We have a set of rules about rest – planning it properly and not too many shifts consecutively so there’s time for rest. Sometimes shift run over, and people end having to stay on site due to other circumstances, something further down the cycle so if people work a longer shift we have to have something in place so they aren’t going to work the following night – and that is a really important part of what we do. It’s vital we understand fatigue and mitigate the risks.

 

Simon: So let’s talk about mental health now – we’ve done some work with the suicide prevention charity CALM so we know 75% of all suicides are male – which means that every 2 hours, somewhere in the UK, a man takes his own life. I imagine most of your operatives are male and I know you take this very seriously so talk us through how you support staff on mental health.

 

Paul: Unfortunately we have lost colleagues who have taken their own lives. Its terrible for all involved – so desperately sad. Many years ago under the auspices of our Safety Director, Craig Williams, we set up a mental health first aid group. That came out of those tragedies. Craig made it his mission and we set up a strong group of mental health first aiders across the company. We began to see other things happening that people were doing in the industry. A few years ago we engaged the services of a mental health counsellor. The results have been remarkable. We do a staff survey averey 18 months and we collect information about disability. The survey results were astonishing – we have 14% of employees declaring a disability – on the face of it it’s potentially worrying but actually it reflects the national statistics and it made us proud of the work we have done.

 

In 2021 our counsellor conducted 227 sessions – wellbeing checks, management support meetings – teaching managers how to deal with mental health of colleagues, 38 crisis risk assessments with 71 additional meetings and that wasn’t  because it was a bad place to work – I think the numbers reflect what life is like for people in society in general.

 

We ‘are really pleased we’ve been able to offer that support. We do red flag training – it’s about getting our staff onto this course – and some people don’t want to do it an d that’s fine – but those who do are taught to look after colleagues and learn about the red flags. A chat often helps. It takes the stigma out of mental health and wellbeing. We all suffer with doubts and mental health problems from time to time and having that time and to see it as normal – going back to the statistics about men being very vulnerable in this area, the more we can do to overcome the stigma, the better off we will all be,

 

Simon: That sounds like an excellent programme. It works both ways, doesn’t it? Not only picking up on others with problems but identifying issues you may have yourself?

 

Paul: I think the figures I went through actually reflect that. People have reached out about things and were we not doing this they may not have had anywhere to go. As an organisation we are pleased we have done this. We all have those moments of doubts and most manage but if we’ve helped people struggling to recognise it’s not something they should cover up – we help them manage and they can help themselves to manage.

 

Simon: And, of course, stress and pressure don’t just come from the job itself, they come from outside in their personal life as well, in the employee’s personal life. How do you support on that?

 

Paul: Yes – that’s the whole point of the wellbeing programme. There’s the physical and mental side – there’s the financial side with the cost of living crisis- we know people are struggling across society. I was in a meeting earlier, a business community meeting, talking about hygiene poverty. Which has an effect on working life – some employees couldn’t afford to keep themselves clean so they are skipping work.

 

If you’re driving down the road and your head is full of worries about bills, how are you concentrating on driving and will you spot that person who steps in front of you – the pedestrian or the cyclist, the horse rider – financial worries have an effect and they are a problem. We have provided access to financial advisers for our employees so if they catch things earlier it’s easier to mitigate. We also provide schemes for discounts and vouchers – money off shopping and spectrum health – little things that help.

.

 

Simon: It also helps in making your staff feel valued – that you put all that effort into supporting them. You sit on the Committee for Fairness, Inclusion and Respect in Construction so you’re obviously personally passionate about these issues. Tell me a little about your work with the committee and something that I believe you call ‘Social Wellbeing’

 

 

Paul: It was set up a while ago – 2013 – CICA, the CITB and the Supply Chain Sustainability School. It’s about making the industry better for everybody. Better for business – about treating everyone fairly and including everyone with respect. It’s about treating people with equity and compassion and discouraging inappropriate behaviour like bullying and increasing the diversity of our work force.

 

Construction is a male dominated industry – providing opportunities for women, ror people across different backgrounds, for people with disabilities., The statistics tell us that the more diverse a company and its culture, the better performing that organisation is. I’m on the steering committee and it provides materials to help people look at the business case for inclusion. Going back to wellbeing it’s making work more inclusive. You can’t run a safe site if everyone is not included,. It uses simple language. People shy away from ED and I – equality and diversity inclusion – because they are worried about being predominately a white male industry. What this message is – we need to improve but we are where we are so it’s about measuring our statistics and helping us to help ourselves. We have a skills shortage – we need to attract people form every walk of life. The social mobility does encourage people – the opportunity is out there. It takes us into schools – we won an inspiring change award for that work – we do product talks, road safety campaigns for schools and it takes you into places you would never have thought you could go to – but you are putting something back into society.

 

Simon: Final question Paul as we start to wrap up. We’ve just published your updated case study and WJ is well known in the highways industry for its commitment to safety management in all areas of the business, and I know you view driver safety and wellbeing as just another area of employee safety that needs to be managed to the same high standards.

The case study showed that over a period of 15 months you reduced collisions by 40% and associated costs by 45% plus significant reductions in fuel use and emissions. And that’s on top of equally impressive reductions from your previous case study. It really speaks to how healthy and safe staff help drive the business to new highs for performance and efficiency, and that genuine long-term commitment from those at the top of the business drives continuous improvement, doesn’t it? How important is that commitment at the top?

 

Paul: Absolutely vital – making employees feel valued. They are fairly paid – it’s that interaction between the people. We should all be part of one team. It’s about designing our jobs better with wellbeing in mind and that is got to be your first priority as a manager. Our driver behaviour scheme has worked incredibly well for us. It’s based on a carrot not a stick – based on telematics. The reductions you quote came out of that. Every month at each of our depots there’s a £100 prize for the best driver and also £50 – for the most improved – I think in my own mind that’s the good prize.

 

And a £1000 prize at the end of the year for the best driver. The savings that have been made pay for the prizes many times over. It’s about trying to look after people as a whole. Safety doesn’t stop at the site boundary – and wellbeing certainly doesn’t

 

 

 

Simon: I think that it’s clearly testament to the results you’ve seen – it’s clearly working for you. Thank you so much for being our guest today and for your continued support of Driving for Better Business. I’d like to applaud you for everything you’re doing on this vital subject of wellbeing. I think that you’re making your staff and drivers feel extremely valued.

We’ve published your revised case study on our website and also a feature on the work you’re doing on wellbeing and some of the things we’ve discussed today. We’ll put details and links in the show notes.

 

***********************

 

(transition)

 

Simon: If you manage drivers and their vehicles, and you face similar issues to

those discussed in this podcast, there are links in the show notes to some useful

resources on the Driving for Better Business website. And these are all free to

access. If you enjoyed the conversation, please don’t forget to hit subscribe – so you

know when the next episode is released. And please also give us a 5-star review, as

this helps us to get up the podcast rankings, and makes it more visible to others who

might also find it useful. You can follow us – that’s Driving for Better Business on

Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn. And most importantly, please help us to spread the

word. All our resources are free for those who manage fleets and their employees

who drive for work. Thank you for listening to Let’s Talk Fleet Risk, and I look forward

to welcoming you to the next episode.