Rank: New forum user 
|
Bit of a dissagreement at the company I work for regrding driving Near Misses. Currently only RTA's, Road Rage, complaints from members of the public regarding driving techniques of our badged up vehicles are recorded. I think that something like a skid on black ice would not be recorded, and how many times do you have to break suddenly. Just wondered what other people think. Regards
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
This is all down to company policy. HSE are not really interested and of course RIDDOR does not apply. Nevertheless any company that takes the health and safety of its employees seriously needs to look at driving by its employees. There should be a company driving policy and this needs to include some form of incident reporting including near misses. It will be down to you to decide what constitutes a near miss. The key thing is that there is standard company wide definition. In many organisations, driving for work is the most hazardous activity that they do but often they ignore it because, if they didn’t, they would realise that there are loads of issues that might need to be adreessed and staff often don’t like it when their driving is being questioned; being on the road is an opportunity for the employees to be free of direct supervision which is why some of them love going on very drives away from base in bad weather at night etc. The thing is, if you do embark on this approach you might discover that some of the driving you do is not strictly necessary and should really be eliminated if you apply your hierarchy of controls.
|
 2 users thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
A slip on black ice or wheel spin trying to pull out too sharply or even being flashed at for a poor overtake or pulling in forcing another driver to respond could all be near miss if you want to go that far. but I wouldn't.
however, slipping on ice and drifting off the road, a non-reportable rta incident under the road traffic act, but may well be worthy of a near miss. Driving activity, as mentioned above, is something of an anomaly. Companies have great policies, procedures, training etc and yet if they truly put them into action would not only stop their own business but probably the whole network.
I may not be promoting report motoring near misses per se, but certainly would like employers to encourage driver feedback on their driving activity and actioning accordingly -
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
The more you "intrude" in to driver space the greater the risk to employee satisfaction. If my employer wants to install a black box to locate a stolen vehicle fine. If they want the black box to monitor driving at all times they can have the vehicle back - it may monitor accelaration/decelaration what it does not do is correlate this to the road conditions including weather/other road users/animals domestic & wild - all external influences affecting how the vehicle is driven. Yes driving can be more concientious - trouble is employers tend to compound distraction by insisting on timed activity according to mapping systems. The on-line traders are a great example of a pressurised distribution activity where one is now even suggesting they will install cameras to monitor their drivers and their driving under the guise of "safety". What they are really saying is they do not trust their employees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The more you "intrude" in to driver space the greater the risk to employee satisfaction. If my employer wants to install a black box to locate a stolen vehicle fine. If they want the black box to monitor driving at all times they can have the vehicle back - it may monitor accelaration/decelaration what it does not do is correlate this to the road conditions including weather/other road users/animals domestic & wild - all external influences affecting how the vehicle is driven. Yes driving can be more concientious - trouble is employers tend to compound distraction by insisting on timed activity according to mapping systems. The on-line traders are a great example of a pressurised distribution activity where one is now even suggesting they will install cameras to monitor their drivers and their driving under the guise of "safety". What they are really saying is they do not trust their employees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I'm with AK - before I would start on considering how to define the "near misses" that those driving company vehicles or ANY vehicles should be recording I would question why the driving is being done in the first place. A lot of what is initially asserted as "essential" simply isn't. We used to have people regularly going to a large site on an island. The excuse for driving was the amount of PPE they needed to take with them. Solution provide second set of PPE in site offices (with plenty of room there). For people who would be visiting the same site on a regular basis for years, the cost of that additional PPE is peanuts. The public transport options to get the people there were easy - cheaper, quicker and regular. Edited by user 13 February 2021 12:16:22(UTC)
| Reason: Incomplete sentence
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Since we have moved away from the production line type set up many employers are struggling to work out how to manage people who do not work under direct supervision. Some businesses simply take the out of sight out of mind approach, others obsess with remote control which leads to things like spies in the cab system. Roundtuit is right that many employers describe these as safety devices, but they are rather a way of ensuring staff deliver their targets. In that case it is the responsibility of the employer to set realistic targets which do not lead to driver fatigue and increased RTA, ie they need to create a risk assessment to manage driving for work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Or you farm out the driving to third parties like many an on-line retailer.
That way it is not you:
- paying less than minimum wage after deductions
- threatening to dismiss drivers for failing to meet targets - ignoring working time rules (let's not even discuss driver hours) - turning a blind eye to driving offences - not having to provide holidays, sick pay, breaks - not running a fleet of vehicles https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/couriers-delivering-amazon-earn-little-23496372
Now approaching six years since the publication of The Modern Slavery Act 2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Or you farm out the driving to third parties like many an on-line retailer.
That way it is not you:
- paying less than minimum wage after deductions
- threatening to dismiss drivers for failing to meet targets - ignoring working time rules (let's not even discuss driver hours) - turning a blind eye to driving offences - not having to provide holidays, sick pay, breaks - not running a fleet of vehicles https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/couriers-delivering-amazon-earn-little-23496372
Now approaching six years since the publication of The Modern Slavery Act 2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.