Posted By Shane Johnston We are in the process of writing the policy on mobile phones. Our approach has been to ban hend-held and discourage the use of hands-free. Explaining that there are call diverts, answering services etc available. We have also told all employees that should they call a mobile and become aware that the individual is driving, they are to hang up. After all each employee has a duty to other employees and by staying on the phone they are putting the other employee at risk. Shane

Posted By John Mackessack Steve, As research (courtesy of RoSPA, Aston Uni etc) suggests, it is the subject matter of the call which poses as big a hazard as the mode of operation of the phone. I believe this, as I can always spot someone on the phone a mile off on my daily (motorcycle) commute. They are normally gesticulating and talking to the A-pillar whilst wandering across their lane at about 70% of the speed of surrounding traffic! However, the 'earth-is-flat' brigade out there refuse to accept these findings but I have heard a positive slant relating to the banning of hands-free units, which may dispell some of the cynicism. An ex-colleague who worked for a sister company banned the use of hands-free units as part of their overall policy. Their drivers (mainly sales staff) were instructed to divert the phone to answerphone. When they stopped for a break/fuel stop etc (break frequency was also recommended in their policy!) they could retrieve their messages. Invariably the calls were from customers with in-depth queries or complaints. They found that because they did not have to take the original call 'on the hoof', they were better able to prepare and respond to their customer and ultimately felt it helped their business and customer service rather than hinder it. However, their approach to driver safety and Occupational Road Risk was already well developed throughout the organisation so this step was not big deal to most of their staff, many of whom were fully-fledged RoADA (RoSPA Advanced Drivers Association)members.

Posted By Ian Mycroft All the research and associated reports identify that using mobile phones whilst driving, whether hand held or hands free is unsafe. One particular piece of research, carried out in America showed: • That reaction time while driving and using a cell phone is worse than reaction time when driving under the influence of alcohol. Breaking distance traveled when driving at 70 mph; Normal reaction 102 ft (31 meters) Alcohol affected 115 ft (35 meters) Using Hands-free phone 128 ft (39 meters) Using Hand-held phone 148 ft (45 meters) • That drivers are also less able to maintain a constant speed • That drivers found it difficult to keep a safe distance from the car in front Whilst this suggests that using hands free is “less dangerous” than hand held, which we would all accept, being “less dangerous” is not the same as being safe and it is still more dangerous than driving under the influence of alcohol. Would we endorse giving employees an alcoholic drink before expecting them to drive! I think not! From December 2003 it will be illegal to use a mobile (hand held or with an ear piece) whilst in control of a vehicle. the decision to exclude the fitted in hands free devices was not made on the grounds of safety but rather on grounds of ease of enforcement. Persons involved in an accident whilst using the hands free kits can still be prosecuted for driving without due care and attention or even careless / dangerous driving. Regardless of this new legislation not specifically including the use of hands-free kits, there is still existing health and safety legislation to consider. Section 2(2)(a) of The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 states: 2(1) It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees. 2(2) Without prejudice to the generality of an employer's duty under the preceding subsection, the matters to which that duty extends include in particular— (a) the provision and maintenance of plant and systems of work that are, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe and without risks to health; Therefore this section of the act could be breached by an organisation providing the kits for employees to use whilst at work and as part of their job, similarly any procedure which requires people to contacted by mobile phone or make calls whilst driving would be considered to be an unsafe system of work. Regulation 3(1)(a)(b) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 require that: (1) Every employer shall make a suitable and sufficient assessment of— (a) the risks to the health and safety of his employees to which they are exposed whilst they are at work; and (b) the risks to the health and safety of persons not in his employment arising out of or in connection with the conduct by him of his undertaking, In this case the risk assessment then would have to take account of the harm that could be caused to other road users, including pedestrians and any passengers in the vehicle, if an employee using a mobile phone were to be involved in or cause an accident. Then there is the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998: Regulation 4 Suitability of work equipment (1) Every employer shall ensure that work equipment is so constructed or adapted as to be suitable for the purpose for which it is used or provided. (2) In selecting work equipment, every employer shall have regard to the working conditions and to the risks to the health and safety of persons which exist in the premises or undertaking in which that work equipment is to be used and any additional risk posed by the use of that work equipment. This requires an assessment to be made taking account of the location in which the work equipment is to be used (e.g. busy road, etc.) and to take account of any risks that may arise from the particular circumstances. Such factors can invalidate the use of work equipment in a particular place. When you apply the reasonably practicable test to making/recieving calls whilst driving, you should ask the questions, What is so important that it can't wait untill the end of the journey or the next break? What happens when these people are on holiday or on sick leave? How will the organisation cope when they can't be contacted because they've been killed in car crash, whilst one of their collegues was talking to them on the phone? The risk, no matter how small some may argue it to be, is just not worth it. And thank you to all those who responded to my posting on this much debated subject.

Posted By Ron Young Fully agree witrh Ians comments and the total ban line is one that I'm pursuing in my company albeit with quite a bit of resistance from certain departments. It's an emotive subject but when you listen to the way the Government & HSE are treating the whole subject of managing road risk and the way the Police are expected to react to future RTA's on the back of legislation & guidance, isn't it worth going that bit extra to ensure we are doing better than we are presently legally required.

Posted By Sean Fraser Ron, I found the RoSPA report "The Risk of Using a Mobile Phone While Dirving" to be quite persuasive: http://www.rospa.co.uk/p.../road/mobiles/report.pdf I'm not sure where the claim that using a mobile is more dangerous than being intoxicated came from as it isn't in that report. I've heard a similar claim recently, but that was in relation to fatigued drivers.

Posted By Charles New I understand the reference regarding the use of mobiles being more dangerous than drink comes from research carried out by Direct Line Insurance and the Transport Research Laboratory. It is available from Direct Lines' website

Posted By Steve Mercer Many Thank you to all for your responses so far. This issue is certainly a 'hot topic' with many organisations. In terms of a total ban, I feel confident that it is the right approach to take. As you may have already found, there is a lot of research on the internet (some credible, some helpful and some not so) and arguements for and against. This doesn't help you when you have to influence an organisation. It seems to me that a significant reason for the non adoption of a total ban was because it could not be enforced. Respondents who took part in the policy research (before it became law) answered the following question - Do you agree that the proposed offence should not include hands-free phones? - Yes, agree 495 - No, further action is required? 387 - Unknown, undecided, unanswered 158 Of those who answered yes above, - 119 said it was no worse than conversing with passenger/listening to radio - 102 said it was Unenforceable - 101 said it was safer/reduces distraction Some Cos. may decide to take a position of 'sitting on the fence' to see how this issue develops. At the end of the day, research still suggests there is a risk with hands free whilst driving. Hands free may reduce the risk, but to what degree? How many drivers do you still see with their phone in their hands? Companies will have commercial interest in mind to maintain existing levels of contact with employees, therefore there is a need to have a balanced and well thought out arguement for a policy to ban use. Cost savings could be one!! Additionally, it must be recognised that mobile phone cos. also have an interest in retaining customers, particularly those with large accounts/company car fleets. As a result, discounts are being offered to prevent the 'drop-off' in network usage/revenue. What did we ever do before mobile phones were introduced? Amongst other things, good organisation. RoSPA reasonably state that drivers should take breaks around 2hrs - 2.5hrs on any journey (RoSPA). Maybe organisation's can come up with adopting alternative communication methods and practices to work around this, voicemail, email, re-directing phone calls, etc. In the meantime, I look forward to seeing this thread develop! Thanks again for all your responses so far, it's been useful. Regards Steve

Posted By Ian Mycroft Further to the Directline report, I have asked Directline the following question: The Directline mobile phone report suggests that even hands-free use of mobile phones can be dangerous. Will the fitting and use of these kits therefore affect insurance cover? To which I received the following answer: "While the fitting of these kits will not affect your insurance, if there is evidence to suggest that a mobile phone of any description was being used, then it could have a bearing in the way the claim is dealt with".

Posted By Eric Burt Allan The idea of a members notice board is one which I have floated before. I think it would be really useful if we could download our documents onto this site and allow colleagues to have free access. I understand the sensitivities of IOSH having non-IOSH approved material on their site, but I agree with you that the usual disclaimers could be used. It would save being bombarded with requests for documents. After all, the HSE do it on their web-site !! Eric