TACHOGRAPHS
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
a golden opportunity missed?
by David Lowe
SINCE the Government first introduced the Transport Bill in December 1967, the possi bility of legislation requiring tachographs to be fitted to goods vehicles as part of the scheme to reduce drivers' hours has caused considerable concern to drivers, unions, trade associations and management alike.
This concern has received a lot of publicity, most of it adverse because of the way in which the tachograph has been branded by drivers as "the spy in the cab".
Much of the criticism and ribald comment was expected, particularly from drivers, but surprisingly the unions and some sections of management have supported the drivers' point of view. I say "surprisingly" because one would have thought that they would have accepted the legislation wholeheartedly for its undoubted advantages in the common effort to improve efficiency, increase productivity and reduce costs and accidents.
In this feature we have tried to look at the use of tachographs from both sides, the hopes of its supporters and the fears of its opponents. We have also taken a look at some of the technical difficulties which may have to be faced in the event of fitting becoming a legal requirement.
What hopes of tachographs? Hopes that at last legislation would make it possible for vehicle operators to really get down to improved productivity arrangements and that the law-breaking driver and sharp practice haulier would at last be trapped. Unfortunately, these hopes have been temporarily dashed by the Ministry of Transport, which is about to announce a reduction in driving hours without the introduction of tachographs.
It has long been argued that one should not come without the other. In fact, it has been suggested that the shorter hours could not possibly work without a more effective means of enforcement than the mere completion of a daily log sheet. The Ministry, however, in its wisdom, seems 'to have yielded to union opposition or pressure, or has decided to avoid the unpopular reaction which would certainly have followed the introduction of reduced hours and tachographs at one stroke. Whether the matter will rest there for good (and some think it will and, of course, some hope it will), or whether it will be revived again later when the second stage of the • reduction in hours is brought in, is purely a matter for conjecture.
It is to be regretted, however, that such an opportunity of providing vehicle operators, by legislation, with some of the most essential information concerning their businesses has been missed. There are considerable positive benefits from the use of these instruments whether of the simple time and mileage kind or the sophisticated time, mileage, speed and engine speed type. The information that can be obtained from careful analysis of the charts gives the operator untold opportunities to find ways of increasing productivity and reducing costs.
Productivity
Productivity, or rather increased productivity, is a theme which has been increasingly used by the Government in its exhortations to British industry and in this they have had much support from the unions. Management in industry has responded in many ways to the Government's pleas, especially since rises in wages and salaries are frequently examined by the Prices and Incomes Board on the criteria of increased productivity. Why then has the transport industry missed out on a sure way to find increased productivity? Why have the trade associations and management in the industry apparently failed to persuade the Ministry to bring in this legislation which would be of so great an advantage to them? These questions are difficult to answer. But one answer must surely lie in the fact that the transport industry in general is still not fully aware of the information that can be obtained from tachograph charts and the uses to which that information can be put. The transport industry in Germany has accepted tachographs since 1952 because of pressure from drivers and unions who could see the benefits from greater productivity, freedom from exploitation of drivers and a reduction in accidents.
How do tachographs prevent accidents is a question which has often been asked. To be correct, they don't prevent accidents, but by an improved standard of driving, which results from drivers having an analysis of their driving methods recorded for all to see, the risks are greatly reduced. It has been quite clearly demonstrated that careful analysis of tachograph charts can illustrate good and bad driving methods. The driver who forces his vehicle along with heavy use of the throttle and brakes will soon be caught out; in fact it could be shown to him even when his wheels locked under heavy braking. To be able to demonstrate these bad habits to him in black and white must surely have some effect which will lead to an improvement in his driving habits. The good, steady driver on the other hand will provide proof of this to his employer and obviously will be treated accordingly.
One of the benefits to drivers is that the tachograph is a reliable witness on his behalf in the event of him being wrongly accused of speeding, being in a particular place when he was somewhere else in the event of an accident. It is possible that eye-witnesses may give evidence against him as to his speed or harsh driving at the time of an accident, but if this was not the case then he has proof of it, proof that is, that will be accepted in court. Another advantage to drivers is in any disputes over loading, unloading or waiting times. The charts will show the truth and will prevent the need for a driver to make up lost time simply because he knows his employer won't believe his stories about long delays.
Benefits to the vehicle operator from improvements in driving habits and a reduction in accidents are considerable. Substantial reductions in insurance premiums and operating costs will be found, together with improved vehicle performance and life. The operating cost reductions will be obtained by substantial savings in fuel, which is the biggest item of running costs, reduced tyre wear, less wear and tear on engine and transmission units and a general reduction in wear of the whole vehicle which must lead to less "down" time and an improved vehicle appearance.
In addition to the information from the charts which show the driving methods of his employees, one of the major items will be an analysis of all standing and waiting time of the vehicle. It is in this sphere that the greatest opportunities are presented to the operator to really go to town. It is possible to analyse every stop, find the reason for it and then set about a cure for all unnecessary lost time. This can be done by close liaison with customers at collection and delivery points and careful selection of routes. In both cases investigation may well show that even a slight rearrangement in time could reduce delays. Collection and delivery by appointment rather than letting a driver wait in a long queue or a re-route to avoid heavily congested areas might save considerable time with a saving in mileage. In some instances a choice may have to be made between less time or longer mileage, but it is better to do this as a result of a close analysis of all the factors rather than let a driver just choose what suits him best.
Drivers' co-operation with their employers to achieve reductions in costs by improved driving methods, quicker turn-round times and careful selection of routes is the basis of improved productivity on which agreements for reduced hours and improved pay can be negotiated. Without the co-operation of his drivers an employer is fighting a losing battle and without tachographs he has no means of obtaining the detailed information necessary to start making any improvements in employment conditions.
Fears
Who is it that fears tachographs, and why? It is, of course, drivers in the main who fear a loss of their freedom and independence. But, one may ask, freedom to do what? Break the speed limits? Flog vehicles to death? Contravene the drivers' hours regulations? Or just hang about in cafes and make up time later? It is not fair to suggest that a large proportion of lorry drivers are guilty of these sins, but if this is the case, why has there been such an outcry about the "spy in the cab"? Granted, if a driver is in the habit of breaking the speed limit, exceeding his hours and flogging his vehicle to death in order to improve his wages he is not going to take kindly to regulations which provide a means of stopping this and consequently reducing his earnings. But surely this is what tachographs and drivers' hours regulations are all about—the prevention of these offences in the interests of road safety. Any driver who carries out his work within
the boundaries of the-hours of work and the speed limits has nothing to fear from the fitting of a tachograph in his cab.
It could hardly be called spying for a vehicle operator to want to know what his driver is doing during the time that he is paying him and also want to know how his very expensive vehicle is being treated. A factory worker or garage mechanic has a foreman or chargehand nearby at all times to ensure he is working, looking after his machine or tools and taking his breaks at the correct time without overstretching them, so why should lorry drivers object to some of this form of supervision?
Of course; this independence and freedom which drivers talk of has always been one of the attractions of the job. But because of this very freedom, some operators have seen ways to exploit drivers and encourage them to break the law. What use is this freedom if one has to break the law to obtain it? There will be no loss of freedom if tachographs come; a driver will still be entitled to his breaks and in many instances to choose his starting time and his route, but he will have to do a fair day's work within the law. This cannot be called a loss of freedom or independence.
The fact that the charts will show if a driver has been speeding, which is one of the biggest objections, may not be of such importance to the employer as the unions and the drivers think, especially if the speed attained is easily within the capabilities of the vehicle. It is only when the vehicle is being pushed beyond its limits that the employer will become concerned. But in any case he knows his drivers, the steady types and the fast men, and the information on the chart in respect of speeding and erratic driving will only confirm what he already knows.
Who else fears tachographs?—the unions? Or is it just their members that they fear? As Mr. John Moon has explained in his paper to the IRTE, the compulsory introduction of tachographs in Germany in 1952 was as a direct result of pressure by the unions, who were afraid of the exploitation of their members by unscrupulous employers and who also realized the value of these instruments in helping to cut down accidents. Experience had shown a 50 per cent reduction in accidents in bus and lorry fleets
where tachographs had been fitted on a voluntary basis compared with vehicles in fleets without them. It is difficult, then, to understand so strong an objection from our unions. They must be aware that increased earnings and security for their members these days can only come from increased productivity within the drivers' hours regulations and within the speed limits. Any gains in productivity achieved by exceeding the hours regulations or speed limits must be short-lived in view of the increasing steps being taken by the Ministry of Transport and the police to improve enforcement. If, then, any increase in productivity is to be gained within the requirements of the law, and there is no doubt that this is the only way, then it is reasonable to expect that employers should be allowed an efficient means of obtaining the information to determine how productivity can be improved.
If we assume that the unions accept the need for increased productivity, what then are their objections? Why don't they support the use of tachographs which may well help reduce accidents to their members and remove the fringe element of drivers who consistently break the law and endanger other road users? Many of these drivers who break the law do so at the will and command of unscrupulous employers. Surely the unions, as much as anybody, would be glad to see these operators either brought into line or removed from the industry altogether. The tachograph is one means of helping to do this.
The only logical conclusion is that it is not the tachograph itself which the unions fear, but a revolt by their members if they supported the legislation. Indeed, one of their spokesmen has recently said: "If you brought them in there would not be any drivers on the road. Whether it would be official or unofficial does not matter."
Resentment
Any suggestions, and the unions have made suggestions, that a new, more detailed form of driver's log book will be sufficient to restrain the law breakers and provide the necessary basis for employers to institute improved productivity working, are completely without reason. Drivers' log sheets have been in existence for long enough and there has always been plenty of resentment about filling them in. Is a driver more likely to fill in an even more detailed form at the same time as taking a cut in hours? I do not think so. The same element that avoids the present regulations regarding hours and log sheets would continue to flout the new hours regulations and find means of fiddling or avoiding any new type of log sheet. No, there is no doubt that the time has come to have an accurate, reliable, fiddle-proof means of ensuring that regulations are complied with and that vehicles are worked to the utmost benefit within their mechanical capabilities. The tachograph is the only answer.
What happens now? The Ministry has put the legislation on one side; the drivers are happy, and so, presumably, are the unions. Managers in the industry don't, I think, really know whether they are pleased or sorry. Pleased that they have temporarily been saved another worry and another expense. but sorry that they have not been forced into something which they know in the long run would be to their advantage. It looks as though the best that can be achieved now is fitting on a voluntary basis if negotiations with unions and drivers are successful enough to allow it.