http://uknip.co.uk/2017/03/mobile-phone-lorry-driver-jailed-for-five-year-after-fatal-crash/

A lorry driver who was distracted by a phone call when he collided with a motorcyclist has been jailed for five years.

He was using a set of headphones and his handset was attached to the dashboard, using it hands-free, which is legal.

Did we ever get to the bottom of the hands-free issue of a single button push, if the phone is in a cradle?

 Does anyone know what the legislation that this come up in was actually called. Tried to google it and only got newspaper opinion, which is generally unreliable. So, would like to see the legislation myself to see if there is any form of definition of hands free.

Thanks

Chris

Each time we have had these discussions, somoene has given an opinion based on the research they had seen, yet never came back with a reference for that research when requested.

So for anyone that wants to read the facts for themselves (rather than say-so) I have found a good website with references to back up the data.

Driver distractions general: http://www.brake.org.uk/...ts/1131-distractionfacts

Mobile phone and screens (whilst driving): http://www.brake.org.uk/...-responding-at-the-wheel

There are lies, damned lies and statistics

BRAKE has an agenda - think they are going to present reports that diminish their cause?

Just as the Daily Wail would ever print something positive about immigrants / negative about Diana (other biased publications are available)

Originally Posted by: WatsonD

Each time we have had these discussions, somoene has given an opinion based on the research they had seen, yet never came back with a reference for that research when requested.

So for anyone that wants to read the facts for themselves (rather than say-so) I have found a good website with references to back up the data.

Driver distractions general: http://www.brake.org.uk/...ts/1131-distractionfacts

Mobile phone and screens (whilst driving): http://www.brake.org.uk/...-responding-at-the-wheel

For your information I did reference my original posting with a link to both websites. However the thread has now been locked and I can't be bothered referencing them again.

Thanks all, and especially Mr Insurance for the legislation link.

I think either with my current employer or future employer, I will end up in a discussion at some point and will need to know what the actual law states. There are many versions of hands free, from those that can be answered by voice or a paddle on the steering wheel or there is the touch of the radio / the phone button in a cradle. So, at worst case scenario I would want to be able to say if one system is allowed and on other not or whatever, regardless of any personal feelings.

My personal (dare I say professional view) can be given as well, and try and either dissuade or at least limit the use of hands free. But we have all been hearing the adverts which have clearly (rightly or wrongly) said hands free is still ok and so have our employers. We can do our best as in all things to advise and promote good practice, but ultimately, they must decide.

Not sure where the links to the specific AA site are, noted above, but from the AA web site I found these sentences, which at worst are at least practical. Especially keep to very short conversations ie “I will be another half an hour” or “I will call back when I get there” type.

From the AA web site

“It is permissible to answer a call on a hands-free phone. Some people seem to think that the new law makes it an offence even to press the ‘receive’ button but this is not true. It is still not specifically illegal to answer the phone. Even so it is a bad habit and one that people should avoid.

You may not dial a number on hands-free while driving unless the system is voice-operated. Again, the AA advises that you should not make calls or engage in lengthy conversations on the phone while driving.”

We will encounter from time to time, some employer’s resistance, so I feel it best be prepared. I wonder if the police have actually been given any guidance or have they just been told if it is in their hand or if you think it has affected their driving? With not definition of amount of interaction with the device.

Interestingly, I wonder how the likes of the AA (or RAC, Green Flag and any others) communicate to their breakdown vehicles. Ie a message “stop where you are going and attend the broken-down vehicle of a vulnerable person in a not nice place”. Anyone know how they do it? They do like to consider themselves as an emergency service.

Sorry for the length of post, but I wanted to explain why I wanted the base information.

Chris

RayRapp referred to the previous locked post which had significant exchanges about various sources of information and the actual reports behind the headlines. The point I was making was that with all reports (not only debates about mobile phones in cars) you should be aware of the agenda of those citing them.

3G astro turf definately causes cancer? Despite the media hype the ECHA report in to this subject concluded otherwise

The combined MMR jab causes autism? Well after a lot of parents refused the innoculation this one became discredited

Fracking pollutes water courses? The environmentalists have a raft of reports supporting their view and the extraction companies have their expert reports giving the exact opposite opinion

I did not ask anyone not to believe anything - everyone is free to draw their own conclusions

Society as a whole is yet to decide - even if it does choose to ban all mobile use whilst driving there will remain a stubborn hard core who act beyond the law (drink drivers, drug drivers, speeders, uninsured, unlicenced and banned)

Until such time manufacturers are making increasingly connected vehicles and our legislators have not made it a specific offence so we are left with the morality of the individual, and for company vehicles and their drivers the corporate policy (enforced or lip-service variety)

Just a gentle reminder folks... Attack the subject and not the person.

By all means the validity and biases of sources can be discussed, just do not denigrate individual posters for their choice of source.

Edited to add, the sources in question for this topic relate to the "hands free" discussion. If you want to talk more widely about sources for research in general, then we invite you to start a second topic on the subject in our Study Support Forum.

Carry on.

Edited by user 31 March 2017 10:57:12(UTC)  | Reason: added clarifying paragraph

Roundtuit I take your point on being skeptical about data. However I do need something to hold on to.

Brake may well have their own agenda, but the links (as far I could see) did not suffer from this. They were presented as a statement of facts with external references (university studies, govenment statistics) with information on all types of driver distraction.

Take from them what you will. You may see it as confirmation that phone use whilst driving is the root of all evil; you may find that in the larger scheme of things it just needs careful controls. I make no opinion either way.

Possibly pertinent video sat in this article

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/fined-for-parking-on-pavements-12821205

Entitled "phone fails you need to avoid while driving": Texting sat at lights, pushing two buttons (answer call & speakerphone) whilst the phone is sat on your lap or swiping answer call whilst the phone is sat in a cradle get a big red cross and buzzer from this newspaper. Using steering wheel mounted answer call gets a tick.

Yes, I think regardless of any studies, it is fairly obvious it will distract you to most people. However, I still think as a H&S practitioner we will end up in a discussion from time to time.

After my comment, previously about how do the likes of the AA or RAC or any other similar type organisation, if they ban hands free how do they communicate with their employees, to pass on break down vehicle info. Does anyone know what systems they employ? I don’t think they just work on a first come first served basis, I always thought they diverted their people if the person was considered vulnerable.

I agree that we dont necessarily need to look at research to know that this s a distraction. However, in my experience this can be an advantage when attempting to influence the powers that be.

Chris,

Just a note on the one emergency service I have some knowledge of: our ambulance crews are paired, and it is always the passenger, not the driver, who responds to control while the vehicle is moving,

John

Edited by user 04 April 2017 14:11:27(UTC)  | Reason: Typo

I agree, that is why I’m asking via a sensible discussion how these people should be advised. I suspect being a consultant would mean you would not be able to just impose your will on these people, but have to suggest an alternative way of working. I would have to admit if I had a gas leak and the first engineer I phoned didn’t answer, I would move on to the next, and next.

I’m not sure I believe they will all be enlightened enough to just accept it, when it is not illegal (however morally correct). The average generic “white van man” for instance has been using hand held phones for years, despite the law. 

Interestingly when trying to research this, I came across this, obviously, the AA had a different view of hands free a few years ago (I suspect the others did too)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/o2-beats-vodafone-to-ring-up-its-largest-corporate-deal-with-aa-6095704.html

The other thing I considered in my reflection was that most main towns and cities no longer have anywhere you can just pull over for a few minutes. Not an excuse, but an observation.

I agree with those who have posted that the use of phones whilst driving should a no-no full stop. As a motorcyclist who commutes 70 miles a day I end up filtering past quite a lot of stationary/slow moving vehicles. The amount of people I pass each day using a phone or tablet is astonishing as they obviously feel the law doesn't apply when sat in traffic. I saw a woman watching TV with her i-pad wedged in front of her a few weeks ago! Sadly driving is one of those tasks where people are always right and I don't think it will ever change on the whole. We now have to drive taking into account those who are paying no attention to what they should be doing, driving. Regardless of whether someone has been told not to take calls when driving, if they want to they will. We can only advise/instruct and those caught will have to pay the price, hopefully not at the expense of someone else. I realise motorbikes aren't for everyone but they do give a whole new perspective on road safety compared to the apprent insulated distraction that is a car (and yes, I do drive regularly too).

What criminal offence?

Originally Posted by: stuart46

I agree with those who have posted that the use of phones whilst driving should a no-no full stop. As a motorcyclist who commutes 70 miles a day I end up filtering past quite a lot of stationary/slow moving vehicles. The amount of people I pass each day using a phone or tablet is astonishing as they obviously feel the law doesn't apply when sat in traffic. I saw a woman watching TV with her i-pad wedged in front of her a few weeks ago! Sadly driving is one of those tasks where people are always right and I don't think it will ever change on the whole. We now have to drive taking into account those who are paying no attention to what they should be doing, driving. Regardless of whether someone has been told not to take calls when driving, if they want to they will. We can only advise/instruct and those caught will have to pay the price, hopefully not at the expense of someone else. I realise motorbikes aren't for everyone but they do give a whole new perspective on road safety compared to the apprent insulated distraction that is a car (and yes, I do drive regularly too).

I'm with you on this one Stuart. My commute is a round trip of 80 miles on a motorbike, although not every day, and the behaviour of car drivers is getting worse, not better. If drivers concentrated on what they are supposed to be doing, driving the car, we'd probably get to where we are going quicker, and certainly more safely. I also drive regularly, and have the same feelings when driving. Driving cars has been made too easy, and drivers get complacent, turning to all sorts of distractions with the mistaken belief that they can cope with these. If you are riding a motorbike, that is all you can do, so you don't have these distractions, and it requires constant attention for all the factors involved. This makes riders better road users in my opinion.

Talk of what the law says or doesn't say is missing the point. It doesn't help that you are required to have another witness if you want to report someone for yattering on their phone whilst driving, which considering the largely single occupancy of cars, and only a rider on a bike, doesn't enable other road users to help police the problem. With the reduction in police patrols, the chances of getting caught are slim, so people get away with it and it becomes accepted practice. Until, of course, they kill someone.

Originally Posted by: RayRapp

Originally Posted by: WatsonD

Each time we have had these discussions, somoene has given an opinion based on the research they had seen, yet never came back with a reference for that research when requested.

So for anyone that wants to read the facts for themselves (rather than say-so) I have found a good website with references to back up the data.

Driver distractions general: http://www.brake.org.uk/...ts/1131-distractionfacts

Mobile phone and screens (whilst driving): http://www.brake.org.uk/...-responding-at-the-wheel

For your information I did reference my original posting with a link to both websites. However the thread has now been locked and I can't be bothered referencing them again.

Me too Watson . I have posted the link to the in-depth, real world (not simulated environment) US Department of Transportation study into the safety of handsfree kits again for your convenience as you must have missed it when i posted it before. The study itself is 273 pages long so to make things easy, i've cut and pasted the headline below...

"The results from this study present a clear finding: Visual manual subtasks performed on handheld cell phones degrade driver performance and increase safety critical event risk. Talking on a cell phone, regardless of the type of interface, was NOT ASSOCIATED with an increased safety critical event risk. Pure portable handsfree and integreated handsfree cell phone use – where visual manual handheld cell phone subtasks are excluded – were also NOT ASSOCIATED with an increased safety critical event risk."

In plain text, real world studies undertaken over an extended period of time have shown that talking on a handsfree kit DOES NOT increase the chance of an accident. However, fiddling around with your phone does.

Furthermore, ref the links to the studies you've posted, can i ask if you've actally looked at them yourself? The only reason i ask is becuase i'd say 50% of them aren't relevent to the discussion and have nothing to do with handsfree use (effects of eating at the wheel, listenning to music, smartphone addiction amongst young people in Switzerland..!?!) Of the few that are relevant to, most you seem to have to pay to read and the rest all appear to have been undertaken in SIMULATED ENVIRONMENTS with a tiny number of test subjects. Of course, i've not looked, or even attempted to look, at most of them so if there is one in there which;

A) Was undertaken in the real world with real drivers (rather than students in a lab)

B) Was undertaken over an extended period of time and

C) Still shows that handsfree is dangerous

...then please point me towards it. 

Edited by user 19 April 2017 10:30:39(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Originally Posted by: WatsonD

Thanks Stern. However, I will reiterate that my criticisms were of those that gave an opinion apparently founded on some research they had seen without citing the particular reference, such as: "From the research I have seen it is only a matter of time... blah,blah,blah" (sorry can't point to any particular posts as it is now locked) but I responded to this post with one of my own asking for the source of the research, and suffice to say it was ignored.

The comments were not aimed at those who did cite references.

Watson, with the greatest of respect, isn't "giving an opinion apparently based on some research" exactly what you are doing?

You have openly criticsed those who quoted research but didn't provide links to it. However, all you have done here is posted links to some webpages which contained someone else's (biased) interpretation of cherry picked research and links to a number of reports which were either irrelevant, unavailble or flawed. What is the difference? You are both making bold statements and taking a stance without backing it up with proof.

Again, i would ask that you point me towards a study (not a RoSPA leaflet, an RAC campaign or a Brake webpage) but an actual scientific, peer reviewed study that was  a) undertaken in the real world with real drivers and b) was undertaken over an extended period of time that shows that using handsfree is dangerous.

http://www.techspot.com/news/68983-pretty-much-everyone-uses-their-phone-while-driving.html

US data from Zendrive indicates that Americans are using their smartphones nearly every single time they get behind the wheel spending an average of 3.5 minutes per hour using their phones equivalent to 105 opportunities an hour to cause a fatal accident.

Judging from the report the death statistics are citing driver distraction in all forms not only mobile use

Originally Posted by: Roundtuit

http://www.techspot.com/news/68983-pretty-much-everyone-uses-their-phone-while-driving.html

US data from Zendrive indicates that Americans are using their smartphones nearly every single time they get behind the wheel spending an average of 3.5 minutes per hour using their phones equivalent to 105 opportunities an hour to cause a fatal accident.

Judging from the report the death statistics are citing driver distraction in all forms not only mobile use

Yet a quick google search shows that the number of accidents on US roads has decreased year on year for the past 2 decades, even though there are more cars, mobiles and handsfree kits than ever on their roads. If using handsfree is as dangerous as many people seem to think it is, would we not be seeing the opposite?

The study i posted is still the only large scale real world study into the safety of handsfree that i've seen evidence of on any of these handsfree threads and shows that simply talking on handsfree, in reality, does not increase the chances of crashing.

EDIT: For the record, i am not advocating those who handle their phones whilst driving. I fully accept that this behaviour does increase the risk of crashing. I don't however, given the facts presented, accept the fact that simply pushing a button on a steering wheel and talking increases the chances of a crash and would therefore much rather manage this risk (ie by providing vehicles with integreated handsfree) than push the issue "underground" and risk people using third party handsfree or worse, hand held.

Edited by user 19 April 2017 12:39:17(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified