Analisis de las pruebas del proceso de soldadura

as taxis, buses and trucks. This report highlights the large number of commercial drivers involved in crashes affected by alcohol, as well as those detected with an illegal BAC in roadside breath testing operations, although it was not possible to separate drivers of fleet-owned passenger vehicles in the analysis. Community attitudes support the requirement for commercial vehicles to be fitted with alcohol interlocks, particularly hazardous goods vehicles and articulated and rigid trucks.

It is worth noting that there is presently no requirement for drivers of commercial vehicles in Australia or New Zealand to fit alcohol interlocks.

7.3.1 The case for expansion of alcohol interlocks into fleets and commercial vehicles

The case for the introduction of alcohol interlocks into vehicle fleets and commercial vehicles is predicated on a number of premises. First, fleet vehicles and commercial vehicles represent a substantial part of the vehicle fleet, and due to their very nature have high usage and exposure rates. Second, for large vehicles in particular, the consequences of crash-involvement are high given their poor crash compatibility with other road users due to their mass and geometry.

Direct benefits to fleets and commercial vehicle operators include reduced crash risk; improved worker health; improved productivity due to fewer workdays of lost due to damaged vehicles and injured workers; improved asset management; potential insurance savings; and a mechanism for meeting statutory obligations to provide a safe workplace.

These benefits can be viewed in the context of both a corporate social responsibility perspective and an occupational health and safety perspective (see Bailey et al., 2013; Ecorys, 2014; Martino et al., 2014; Vehmas, & Löytty, 2013). In practical terms, the fitment of any driver monitoring system can reduce offences, promote a safety oriented culture and reduce financial impacts of crashes, injury and illness. Acceptability would be increased if there was no requirement for rolling re-tests.

Despite these benefits, device cost, the potential need for multiple handsets, a high volume and associated cost of disposable mouthpieces, the purported frequency of recalibration and privacy concerns all act as barriers to implementation and widespread voluntary use of alcohol interlocks. The lack of public knowledge regarding device capabilities may also contribute to a device’s perceived intrusiveness and could hinder implementation.

The implications of fitment may differ on an operational level depending on whether the fleet vehicle or commercial business is a sole proprietor, a small-to-medium enterprise, a large corporate or a fleet management company. Regardless, the dominant view among the road safety community is that vehicle monitoring technologies, including alcohol interlocks, act as a safety tool and quality assurance mechanism in the workplace (see for example, Bailey et al., 2013, and others).

7.3.2 The use of alcohol interlocks in commercial vehicles in Europe: An example to follow?

A report published by the European Parliament in March 2014 explored the use of alcohol interlocks in commercial vehicles (Martino, Sitran, & Rosa, 2014). The report noted that in a number of European countries, the use of alcohol interlocks is legally mandated in commercial vehicles for drivers of selected passenger groups, mainly school children and people that require care. As at 2014, three jurisdictions have legally mandated alcohol interlock programs for commercial vehicles:

• Finland, for commercial vehicles used in the transportation of children, the elderly and disabled people since August 2011 (referred to as ‘school and day care transport)

• France, for commercial vehicles used for ‘school transport’ since January 2010

• Sweden, where local authorities can require vehicles to be fitted with alcohol interlocks when making a vehicle purchase.

Austria commenced a pilot program for school bus and commercial drivers to have alcohol interlock devices fitted (Ecorys, 2014), while the voluntary fitment of alcohol interlock units in commercial vehicles is actively encouraged in Denmark, Finland, Sweden, the UK and Norway. As noted in Chapter 3, the Swedish Government has heavily promoted (and in some cases require) the fitment of alcohol interlocks into all commercial vehicles, and consequently, approximately 70% of taxis and 90% of all buses are fitted with interlocks. The Finnish Government is discussing mandating alcohol interlocks for all holders of professional licenses, and for all transport services used by government agencies at all levels.

Interlocks are perceived as a quality assurance mechanism that can ensure employee safety and improve a company’s corporate image. Those against mandating alcohol interlocks in commercial vehicles cite the cost of the technology as a barrier (estimated to be EUR 2,000 plus EUR 100 – 200 for installation plus EUR 20 – 60 for calibration at approximately three month intervals), and note that the number of crashes involving professional drivers is low. To counter this, some proponents state that being in control of commercial vehicles requires additional care and sobriety due to their increased mass, the carriage of large volumes of people and hazardous goods – and that the consequences if and when these vehicles crash are more likely to be negative.

A simplified economic analysis conducted for all light goods vehicles was negative, but when applied to commercial passenger vehicles and heavy goods vehicles, the benefit-cost ratio approached or nearly broke even. Based on these findings, it was recommended that alcohol interlocks be used as a

‘preventative measure in specific categories that either perform safety-sensitive types of transport services (transporting passengers or dangerous goods) or have a large mass and size that could lead to severe consequences for other road users in traffic accidents’ (p.56) (Martino et al., 2014).

The report states that technical standards and quality requirements need to be harmonised and a common code for licenses across the EU implemented. It suggests incentive options, either as a financial incentive or a positive risk rating, to increase the fitment and development of alcohol interlocks (Martino et al., 2014). It noted that as the market increases and innovation occurs, the costs may reduce, but that currently, a mandate requiring the fitment of alcohol interlocks into the commercial vehicle sector would be cost- beneficial (Ecorys, 2014).

7.3.3 The current regulatory environment

Occupational health and safety (OHS) legislation helps define the scope of an employer’s duty of care for their employees. At its most basic, OHS legislation places an onus on commercial entities for the safety of their employees while in the workplace. While OHS legislation has existed in every State and Territory of Australia and New Zealand for some time, all individuals in the workplace must take reasonable steps to undertake their activities safely and be cognisant of the safety of others.

The recognition that the vehicle can be considered a workplace (in Australia), under the provisions of the Work Health and Safety Act, 2011 (No. 137)(8)(i)(ii) (Commonwealth of Australia, 2011) has implications for employers to ensure a safe workplace by implementing safe driving and vehicle safety policies or risk significant penalties. All persons, including employees, must function in a way to take all reasonable steps to minimise risk to themselves and others in the workplace. The legislation encourages proactive management of safety issues. Driver safety is also governed by specific transport and road safety acts in each jurisdiction. The scope of the legislation requires ‘reasonably practical’ actions, including training and supervision to protect against risks to health and safety, providing safety systems and monitoring in the workplace to prevent injuries to employees. Specifically, according to Division 2, 19 (3)(g), the Act states:

that the health of workers and the conditions at the workplace are monitored for the purpose of preventing illness or injury of workers arising from the conduct of the business or undertaking.

In the driving and vehicle context, this includes providing information about vehicle safety features,

behavioural factors impacting driver risk and safe driving practices. This monitoring requirement is especially pertinent to the installation of alcohol interlocks in fleet vehicles, but it can also be interpreted that it is appropriate, and necessary, to monitor driver behaviour using various technologies (including telematics and, in future, connected vehicles) to demonstrate that a safe working environment is provided and maintained, and that the employee is compliant with OHS policies. Within this requirement, it is monitoring driver fatigue which is most commonly thought of, however the requirement applies to other behaviours including drink-driving and speeding.

While Work Health and Safety Regulations define necessary actions for the prevention of risks, none cover driver monitoring in relation to alcohol use and drink-driving. A code of practice should be developed to provide guidance for employees to encourage the uptake of alcohol interlocks into fleet and commercial vehicles.

The Act also stipulates that consultation concerning the monitoring of employee health and associated workplace conditions should occur (Ss. 49 (iii)(iv)). All monitoring should be understood and transparent and comply with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 in Australia and relevant legislation in New Zealand. The promulgation of chain-of-responsibility legislation in 2003 in Australia represented an important turning point in the transport sector, with the provisions ensuring any party engaged in the operation of a transport business is responsible for breaches in road laws. In NZ, chain-of-responsibility provisions, with specific requirements in relation to breach of speed limits and fatigue, sit under the Land Transport Amendment Act

2005 Part 6C Offences relating to chain of responsibility (s 79T).

The Australian National Heavy Vehicle Regulator and the Heavy Vehicle Road Transport Act (2009) as well as associated legislation within each jurisdiction (see:

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/vehicle_regulation/ris/index.aspx) relate to all vehicles over 4.5 tonnes. The significant effect of this legislation should be considered in the context of fitting alcohol

interlocks. Extending chain-of-responsibility legislation to cover vehicle standards and roadworthiness would provide a further avenue to ensure the fitment of vehicle safety features such as an alcohol interlock. A final consideration is the right to privacy. Legislative instruments such as the NSW Workplace Privacy Act

2011, or the Victorian Information Privacy Act 2000 and Surveillance Devices Act 1999 may need to be

considered during the implementation, monitoring and handling of information that arises from in-vehicle technologies such as alcohol interlocks. In particular, the notion of express or implied consent needs consideration prior to fitment. This would require negotiation with employer groups, potentially through an Enterprise Bargaining Agreement with the cooperation of relevant employee union groups.

7.4 Other considerations in the expansion alcohol interlock programs