FTA firm on hours law
Page 5
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• A court's decision to punish a haulier who followed Department of Transport and Freight Transport Association advice on the drivers' hours law (CM 15 September) does not set a precedent, insists the FTA.
Rawtenstall magistrates' ruled that the rolling interpretation of the law, and not the DTp and FrA's wipe-the-slate definition, was correct. This will make it hard for drivers and their bosses to check whether the provisions of the law have been met, warns the FTA.
The association says, however, that its advice to drivers will not change as a result of the decision.
David Green, ETA director of road transport and par liainentary affairs, says hauliers will share concern for the operator "who has done his best to comply with the rules by following the advice of the DTp".
"The FTA has always believed that the DTp's advice was sound and correct and for that reason it has formed the basis of the information we have supplied to members and has indeed been incorporated into our Freightcheck service."
Green says he is in consultation with the DTp over the decision. "In the meantime, we would recommend that operators make no change to their existing procedures and continue to deal with the break provisions on the "wipe-theslate-clean" approach.
Mayfield Chicks, which had denied causing and permitting three drivers to exceed 4.5 hours without taking proper breaks, was ordered to pay a 2300 fine with 2135 costs. This was despite telling the court that it had followed advice on the interpretation of the law from the FTA and DTp.
The DTp says it sees no reason why it should change its views of its interpretation. "Interpretation is a matter for the courts," it says. It has consulted the FTA on the matter.