Conexionado

The Inquiry also examined a number of overseas inquiries into trucking safety to see if parallel issues were raised. In particular, it looked at the report of a recent inquiry into truck crashes undertaken by the Transport Committee of the New Zealand House of Representatives (Storey, 1996). The inquiry was sparked by the death of 118 people in 105 crashes involving trucks in the previous year. The Committee identified a number of disturbing practices including the signing of contracts for owner-drivers that effectively required them to breach traffic laws, requiring drivers to work excessive hours and setting work schedules that encouraged drivers to travel at excessive speeds (Storey, 1996:9). The Report pointed out that breaches of law were widespread and a direct consequence of the commercial advantage pertaining to such behaviour.

Until truck drivers and management start respecting and obeying the law, no attempts to reduce truck crashes will succeed. At present, lawbreakers are being given an economic advantage which will not disappear until a commitment to safety has a greater economic benefit. This severely handicaps the majority of responsible operators (Storey,1996:9).

The Report argued that trucking safety was the responsibility of all those involved in the road freight task, namely freight forwarders, transport operators and the manufacturers and producers who organise transportation of their goods (Storey, 1996:9-10). Indeed, in defining management for the purpose of the inquiry, the report specifically included fleet managers, owner/drivers, tradespersons operating their own truck, freight forwarders and all those ‘who set delivery times, rates and other terms and conditions’ (Storey, 1996:19). In explaining an increasing level of risk taking the report placed particular emphasis on commercial pressures and policies that had intensified competition over freight rates and work. Four quotes from this part of the report illustrate the point. The first quote is from an experience truck business operator:

The real fact of the matter is that those who keep the rates down are doing so by not paying their fair dues and cheating the system. The competition is not being done on a fair playing field. Uneconomic units on the road go a long way to contributing to the accident problem

simply because drivers have to work long hours, they get tired or they don’t have the cash flow to effect repairs to their vehicles (cited in Storey 1996:21).

The Insurance Council of New Zealand was also concerned by the safety implications of intensified competition.

Increased competition in the transport industry has resulted in drivers extending driving hours in order to maintain their income. The problem is especially acute for owner drivers who have been forced to reduce their charge out rate to maintain business. The Council understands many fleet operators add to the problem by pressing drivers to drive beyond legal hours or ignore the issue when their drivers do (cited in Storey 1996:21).

Another experienced transport manager offered the following views on the impact of deregulation:

Road transport operations in New Zealand have undergone significant change over the last ten years. Deregulation and the competitive NZ business environment have allowed transport operators to extend their operations over large geographical areas…

The effect of these changes has caused many operators to stretch their operations to within fine limits in order to gain a competitive edge. This includes tight control on operating costs and the expectation of drivers to work to the limits of regulation.

In some circumstances, those (ie freight forwarders, dispatchers) who cause the use of heavy motor vehicles are unaware of the regulations and transport management factors controlling the use of heavy motor vehicles. Under these circumstances the level of risk is extremely high. In many situations drivers are compelled to work under conditions that fail to have adequate control measures applied to those who are responsible for transport operations. Operators with strong internal policies, controlled procedures and reasonable expectations of their drivers are better equipped to operate within the current environment (cited in Storey

1996:21-22).

The report went on to cite examples of contracts, timetables and other evidence demonstrating how speeding by drivers was legitimated and how drivers were required to work excessive hours. The vulnerability of drivers to accept these conditions without complaint was illustrated by the response of one driver to Police after he had been pulled over:

On 1 March 1995, I ran out of hours at Rotorua, I rang the manager and told him to come and pick the truck up. He told me that if I wasn’t going to go over my hours I might as well f… off (cited in Storey 1996:31).

In its recommendations, the report urges that measures be taken to enforce a level playing field so that ‘an economic advantage is not given to those who break the law and those who play by the rules can compete fairly’ (Story, 1996:32. Other pertinent recommendations are discussed elsewhere in this Report)

The overall picture painted in the New Zealand inquiry is consistent with Australian evidence already cited on the impact of commercial practices on safety. As will be shown, it is also consistent with evidence presented to this Inquiry.

In addition to the New Zealand inquiry the Inquiry was able to examine an even more recent report undertaken by the UK House of Commons Committee of Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs and released in July 2000. A number of the findings of this report are discussed in a later section as they pertain to the issue of operator licensing. Nevertheless, a

number of the findings relevant to the current Inquiry can be summarised here. The report found that the profitability and viability of the road haulage industry had been undermined by a longstanding problem of very low haulage or freight rates (Committee of Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs, 2000:xxii). The report attributed three factors that had kept rates so low namely, entry into the industry was too easy creating an oversupply of operators, there was competition from other European competitors following the 1998 EU cabotage regulation, and some companies routinely ignored regulation to secure a commercial advantage.

The Committee found that, despite the efforts of the Vehicle Inspectorate and police, a significant minority of operators flouted regulations relating to driving hours, vehicle maintenance/defects and other safety-related issues. The Committee (2000:xxvi) noted that there was all but unanimous support for the Inspectorate and Police to have the power to impound illegally operated vehicles even where this involved perishable loads. There was also strong support for substantially increasing resources to the Inspectorate and police so they could more effectively carry out enforcement, and especially to target illegitimate operators. One of the Committee's (2000:xxviii) recommendations was for an increased resourcing of regulatory efforts to target UK 'cowboy' operators and to undertake more inspections of foreign operators. The Committee (2000:xxxi) strongly supported the application of the European Union Working Time Directive but questioned the exemption of self-employed drivers was unjustified (fatigue is a problem for all drivers) and created a loophole that induced the movement of drivers into this category.

3.1.3 Conclusion

In sum, this Inquiry uncovered research evidence as well as evidence presented to various forms of inquiries attesting to a connection between commercial/industrial practices and safety in the long distance trucking industry since the early 1980s if not before. The evidence was more than anecdotal, it was sufficiently consistent to warrant concern, and it was known to at least some industry representatives and government agencies. Moreover, recent inquiries into the road transport industry in New Zealand and the United Kingdom reveal a number of essentially similar findings.

The evidence suggested some clear policy responses to improve safety in the industry. Quite apart from examples of this already presented, a NRTC (1993:17) discussion paper on improving operator performance noted that:

The suggestion that the road transport industry comprises a core of responsible operators (often larger companies) and a fringe of irresponsible operators can be challenged with the limited data reported in the Appendix… There is some evidence that the market power of freight forwarders, agents and consignors of freight contributes to unsafe practices on the road.

But, as will be demonstrated later, while the report canvassed a number of options from mandatory operator licensing through to self-regulated accreditation, there appears to have been no systematic follow up on the issue by the NRTC for some years.

It remains an intriguing but unanswered question as to why the observations and evidence presented above seldom if ever led to policy responses or regulatory changes. There appear to be two reasons for this. First, a number of those with knowledge of the industry who made submissions to the Inquiry argued that some interest groups have fiercely opposed any consideration limiting commercial or industrial practices from which they derived a benefit. For example, in detailed written and oral submissions Associate Professor Philip Laird from the School of Mathematics and Statistics at Wollongong University traced the history of regulation in the industry over the past 20 years. Amongst other things, Laird made a case that

a number of potentially crucial regulatory reforms such as mandating the fitting of tachographs and operator licensing had been delayed or stymied as a result of industry lobbying. Laird also expressed concern at the national regulatory reform process headed by the NRTC, arguing that the reconfiguration of trucks (notably the increase in dimensions and load carrying capacity) was dictated overwhelmingly by considerations of cost-efficiency rather than safety. With regard to truck configuration the latter interpretation found support from another University of Wollongong academic, Dr Arnold McLean from the School of Engineering and others (see Section Two of this Report). The view that safety has taken a back seat to commercialism is not unique to Australia, being repeatedly expressed by truck safety community organisations that have sprung in a number of countries over the last few years. For example, in a recent report Canadians for Responsible and Safer Highways (CRASH, 2000:1) stated:

In a deregulated free trade environment, the trucking industry is under tremendous pressure to cut costs. In order to maintain or seek competitive advantage, provinces may be under pressure to allow bigger trucks, to allow truckers to work more hours and to otherwise downgrade safety standards.

A second possible reason for the reluctance to address these commercial issues is one highlighted in the recent federal inquiry into managing fatigue in transport. This is the prevailing neo-liberal economic orthodoxy in policy making circles which is geared to promoting competition and seems to view any intervention with regard to markets or commercial practices, for safety or other reasons, as anathema.

The Inquiry is not in a position to fully evaluate these contentions although further evidence is presented in later sections of the Report. Whatever the reason, the Inquiry found it extremely disturbing that clear evidence of the role of commercial practices in encouraging hazardous practices could be apparently ignored, and ignored over a number of years. The evidence collected in the course of the Inquiry reinforced this concern. This evidence overwhelmingly confirmed earlier findings.