Michael Monheit, Esquire of Monheit Law, P.C.
Toll Free: 866-761-1385
Email: Michael Monheit
Brian O'Neill of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (Arlington, Virginia) was luncheon speaker at the October 20-21 OECD Seminar on Truck Driver Training and Evaluation held in Qubec City. His subject was truck driver fatigue. He did not mince words.
Mr. O'Neill insisted that any driver who maintains the kind of work schedule permitted by current hours of service rules would be susceptible to fatigue. He cited a series of studies reporting relationships between long driving hours and increased crash risk. Example: a 1994 study of a national motor carrier that found that length of driving time was a stronger risk factor for crash involvement among drivers than time of day. Example: a 1995 study that showed a 2.2-fold increase in large truck crash risk along segments of highways where 15 percent of truck drivers drove more than 9.5 hours in a shift.
Several proposals being touted by the trucking industry for dealing with fatigue were dismissed as ineffective. Mr. O'Neill asserted that, as a biologically determined state, fatigue and its accompanying loss of alertness cannot be combated with training. He expressed doubts about the value of technical devices to measure a commercial driver's fitness for duty. These devices have not been adequately tested in the real world, and there is a particular set of risks if they give false signals. The idea of allowing different carriers to have different hours-of- service rules based on a past safety record was challenged on the grounds that past experience is not always a reliable predictor of the future, and because such an individualized approach threatens to be expensive in terms of government auditing and enforcement.
Mr. O'Neill observed that trucking officials often criticize current hours-of-service rules as being a "one size fits all" approach to a complex environment. He invited the audience to think about what had really proven effective in combating drunk driving. There had been all sorts of regulations, programs, etc. to fight drinking drivers, with only indifferent results. Then, someone suggested a "one size fits all" solution ... the 0.08 limit, and the fight against impaired drivers became effective.
There is a truck driving "0.08" equivalent in place today. It is the per-shift and per-week hourly workload maximums. There needs to be a single, enforceable standard that applies to all long haul truckers. This standard must be objective, easily understood, and easily measured by enforcement agencies.
Mr. O'Neill also made it clear that he opposes any increase in hours-of-service. He stated that "allowing longer driving periods is not justified by existing scientific research".
He did, however, have some suggestions regarding how the trucking industry could usefully attack the risks of driver fatigue. He favours longer required rest periods between driving shifts, onboard computers to reliably track driving times, and improved driver rest areas.
