|
September 5, 2006
Note: To print this newsletter in its entirety, simply press the
print button on your web browser.
CLICK HERE to send us your
comments about this newsletter.
Headline News
Truck Driver Training
Schools Receiving PTDI Certification Exemplify Diversity and Concern for
Quality Nationwide
Alexandria, Virginia – Six truck driver
training schools from Washington to Virginia recently received certification
and recertification of their courses from the Professional Truck Driver
Institute (PTDI). The courses are offered at varying venues, from
publicly-funded colleges to a small, family-run private school, to an
entry-level truck driving company, reflecting the diversity of the programs and
students enrolled nationwide in PTDI-certified courses.
Bates Technical College, a two-year institution that has offered truck driver
training for more than 20 years, is one example of how diverse the population
of PTDI-trained drivers has become. Located in Tacoma, Washington, Bates
educates potential drivers ranging in age from 20s to 50s, and has a balanced
female to male ratio. Some are students seeking a new career in mid-life, while
others are unemployed and desiring a stable job. Some have arrived from
countries such as the Ukraine needing ESL courses, which they can obtain
through the college.
The majority of students come from a 200 mile range. “Some drive 60 to 70 miles
per day to get here,” said Kris Manning, executive dean of instruction. One
reason for the attraction may be that Bates is the only school in the area with
PTDI course certification.
“We look at anything we can do to put an added value piece in our program, and,
of course, PTDI was a perfect fit,” said Manning. But the best advertisement,
he said, is former students. “They come back and speak to the classroom. They
will drive their rigs right up here, and tell the students how great it is.”
Even a small school like Southern Missouri Truck Driving School
benefits from PTDI certification. This family-owned business, with only four
full-time instructors and one part-time, received its first PTDI course
certification in 1999, after only two years in operation. “When potential
students come in here, I try to show them the benefits of getting quality
training even if it may take a couple of weeks longer,” said Regina McClendon,
Administrator of Office & Classroom. “When talking to students, I use an
article I read in Trucker magazine that reported a lower percentage of
truck drivers succeed when they aren’t trained properly. We try to introduce
our students to every situation or experience they may come across to prepare
them, from the simplest things like pulling up to get fuel.
“A graduate of a quick program may get scared in a situation he doesn’t know how
to handle and may not go back to trucking. The trucking industry won’t hold
your hand when you’re out there, but we give them as much as we can to help
them along the way.”
Also recognizing the need for proper training in the industry, Don Hess,
director, Transportation & Public Safety Programs at John Wood Community
College, in Quincy, Illinois, made arrangements for the small truck-driver
training program to apply for PTDI certification as soon as he came on board in
1994. “The first direct benefit of PTDI certification is to the student,” said
Hess. “It’s an assurance that they are indeed getting the proper training. For
the unsuspecting student, there are a lot of fast talkers out there, but when
students see the PTDI stamp of certification, they can be sure that the program
has been checked out thoroughly by an outside and completely objective agency
and found to meet quality training. I’m a firm believer in PTDI and have been
on the board for years.”
While Southern Missouri and John Wood Community College graduate only about 90
students on average, others such as Bates and Iowa Central Community College
graduate more than 150 per year. The one characteristic all these schools have
in common—their commitment to safety and high-quality training. In fact, some
programs exceed the amount of hours PTDI requires and have lengthened their
curriculum as a result of their dedication.
Bates’ truck driver program, for example, is over 700 hours. Iowa Central
Community College increased its hours, from its initial 150 hours in 1971 to
its current 600 hours, which includes on-the-job training. “We exceed those
requirements because we want to make sure that we meet the needs of the
industry and the people we serve,” said Jeff Frank, director of the program.
Located in Fort Dodge, Iowa Central Community College serves nine counties in an
area of the state that is the most populated with trucking opportunities. “We
have national motor carriers in our back door and we are focused on building
relationships with these carriers. It’s our mission to serve them,” said Frank,
adding that more carriers are requesting PTDI certification.
At Iowa Central, students are pre-approved for hire by the carrier on the
condition they successfully complete the program. “We work hard on getting
people prequalified,” Frank said. “We like to put the cart before the horse,
because the student’s focus is much better if he or she is not concerned about
getting a job.”
As one of the largest trucking employers, Swift Transportation
opened Swift Driving Academies to ensure it supplies properly trained drivers
to its companies. “There’s nothing else out there like PTDI,” said Tim McLain,
national director for Swift Transportation. Two Swift Driving Academies,
located in San Antonio, Texas, and in Richmond, Virginia, have just received
initial certification, representing the fourth and fifth Swift locations to
certify their courses. McLain said the company plans to obtain PTDI course
certification for all of its academies nationwide.
PTDI is a national, nonprofit organization established for the twofold purpose
of developing uniform industry skill, curriculum, and certification standards
for entry-level truck driver training and motor carrier driver finishing
programs, and certifying entry-level truck driver training courses at public
and private schools and driver finishing programs at carriers for compliance
with PTDI standards. PTDI is based in Alexandria, Virginia.
Top
Summary and Analysis of FMCSA's Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking on Electronic On-board Recorders (EOBRs) for Hours of Service
Compliance
As current TCA policy dictates the support of EOBR usage on a
voluntary basis, our concerns with an EOBR mandate were as follows based
upon the TCA comments filed in regard to the 2004 ANPRM:
1. Privacy
2. Cost
3. Furtherance of the Driver Shortage Issue
4. Data Ownership
5. Limitation of Technology
The following is an excellent recap of the EOBR Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
announced by FMCSA on Thursday, January 11. TCA will be working with its
membership to develop comments in regard to the NPRM that will appear in the
Federal Register on January 18th .The Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA) announced it will publish a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on the use of Electronic On-Board
Recorders (EOBRs) by the trucking industry for compliance with Hours of Service
(HOS) rules on January 18th. In promulgating this proposed rule, FMCSA is
attempting to answer previous court criticism in the HOS litigation that the
agency had not properly addressed the use of EOBRs, as well as fulfilling
directions given the agency by Congress. The intent of this proposed rule is to
improve highway safety by fostering development of new EOBR technology for HOS
compliance, encouraging its use by motor carriers through incentives and
requiring its use by operators with serious and continuing HOS compliance
problems.
The NPRM has three major thrusts:
1. Proposed Regulatory Incentives to Encourage Greater Voluntary
Adoption of EOBRs – No overall EOBR mandate but beneficial safety compliance
procedures offered and comments on other incentives sought.
The EOBR proposal does not mandate EOBRs for safe and responsible motor carriers
-- it instead attempts to encourage voluntary EOBR adoption. FMCSA lacks
authority to offer the financial incentives or technology tax credits desired
by many in the trucking industry. Only Congress can do that. Here, FMCSA offers
two safety compliance incentives for motor carriers voluntarily adopting EOBRs
for HOS compliance and seeks comments on other potential incentives:
a) Alternative Compliance Review Procedures. When conducting a
Compliance Review on a motor carrier using EOBRs, FMCSA would look at the
entire scope of the carrier’s HOS compliance and not just, as at present, at a
problem area within the motor carrier’s operation. For example, if a motor
carrier had HOS compliance problems within its Northern Division, FMCSA
currently would examine a focused (selective) sample of driver’s logs within
that Northern Division to determine any enforcement action and penalties. Under
the proposal, a motor carrier voluntarily using EOBRs could say that its
Northern Division is not representative of its entire operations and ask FMCSA
to, instead, examine a random sample of logs from everywhere – thus potentially
reducing or eliminating any penalties. b) Partial
Relief from HOS Supporting Documents Requirements. FMCSA recognizes
that EOBRs will capture much of the data on vehicle movement required for
verification of HOS compliance now found in voluminous paper “HOS supporting
documents.” Where EOBRs do the job, FMCSA would relieve motor carriers
voluntarily using the devices from that paperwork burden. (Note, though, that
the electronic records produced by EOBRs do not document what the driver may be
doing when the truck is stopped and other records may continue to be needed to
document on-duty, not driving driver status.)
In addition to these two proposed incentives, FMCSA seeks public comment on
other possible incentives for voluntary adoption of EOBRs, including:
a) whether voluntary use of EOBRs should allow flexibility in the
current 14-hour workday restriction, such as by allowing EOBR-documented rest
breaks to extend the workday;
b) whether voluntary use of EOBRs should allow flexibility in use of sleeper
berths, such as excluding the current 2-hour sleeper berth period from
calculation of the overall workday; and
c)whether voluntary use of EOBRs should allow a more streamlined Compliance
Review, by potentially excluding from the CR segments of a motor carrier’s
operations which utilize EOBRs.
As with the entire NPRM, whether FMCSA adopts the proposed or any further
incentives will depend on public comments, especially comments on the safety
impacts of the rule, incorporating data, research and actual operational
experience.
2. Proposed Mandatory Adoption of EOBRs for a Percentage of Motor
Carriers with a Documented History of Severe Non-Compliance with Hours of
Service Rules – This component establishes HOS non-compliance criteria
which, if met, would trigger a requirement for a carrier to equip all of its
trucks with compliant EOBRs.
While the proposal does not mandate EOBRs for safe and responsible motor
carriers, those motor carriers who are found by FMCSA to have “critical” HOS
non-compliance twice within a two-year period would be required by FMCSA to use
EOBRs. The EOBR requirement would extend to owner-operators under lease to the
non-compliant motor carrier. A “critical” HOS violation is one where 10% or
more of the driver’s logs examined by FMCSA during a Compliance Review are
found not to be in compliance with HOS rules. The NPRM includes a list of 24
possible HOS violations. FMCSA intends by this provision to focus on carriers
with severe problems, while encouraging others to adopt and use this new
technology.
3. Proposed EOBR Performance Specifications – These address how the
recorder must perform, what data it must collect, etc.
FMCSA regulations already allow the use of certain recording
devices for Hours of Service compliance. Under the proposal, existing devices
could continue to be used for the life of the vehicle. The proposal would
update the technical specifications for future devices to bring EOBRs into
today’s electronic engine, digital wireless communication world.
The technical specifications in this NPRM would be performance standards,
setting forth what data the EOBRs need to capture, how frequently, and with
what degree of accuracy and how, then, that data must be presented for law
enforcement purposes. Under these standards, EOBRs would have to include Global
Positioning System (GPS) technology or other location tracking systems to
automatically identify the location of a truck. The standards would
continue to require EOBRs to record the basic information needed to document a
driver and his/her workday, such as: the identity of the driver, duty status,
time, data and location of the truck, distance traveled during operation, etc.
The NPRM does not dictate how EOBR manufacturers are to achieve those
performance standards – it does not propose design standards. The idea at FMCSA
is to allow the marketplace to develop innovative and low-cost devices so that
more motor carriers voluntarily use EOBRs. In particular, the NPRM would not
require the EOBR to be integrated into the truck engine. This would allow
development of, for example, GPS-enabled cell phones for HOS compliance.
The proposal speaks only to the data necessary for verification of HOS
compliance and only applies to drivers and vehicles for which driver logs must
currently be maintained. Motor carriers can choose whether to adopt devices
which also capture operational and proprietary data, such as engine or driver
performance and business transactions. A two-year lead time is built in the
proposal, allowing manufacturers, motor carriers and law enforcement to make
adjustments and conduct training before the final rule would be enforced. This
summary was written by Dave Osiecki, VP Safety, and Security & Operations
for ATA.
Top
ATRI Issues Final Request for
Hours-of-Service Data
The American Transportation Research Institute announced today its final request
for motor carrier safety data to measure the effects of the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration’s hours-of-service provision that substantially
altered the sleeper berth exception affecting drivers’ ability to split sleeper
berth time.
ATRI began collecting quarterly data a year ago in an effort to track changes in
driver safety performance and measure it against the overall safety impacts of
the 2004 hours-of-service rules, which included a more flexible sleeper berth
provision. This data collection is for carrier safety data from the fourth
quarter of 2006
ATRI’s study represents the second phase of data collection as part of its
continuing research to measure the safety impacts of the hours-of-service rules
changes. Information required includes collision and driver injury data
covering the period October 1 through December 31, 2006. ATRI requests that
motor carriers submit data no later than January 26, 2007. Carriers
interested in providing data can contact Brian Smith, ATRI Research Associate,
at (770) 432-0628 or at bsmith@trucking.org.
“The response to our quarterly data collections has been positive and we are
eager to analyze the data to identify safety trends,” said Rebecca Brewster,
ATRI president. “With a similar response to this fourth quarter data
collection, we hope to have preliminary results in February.”
Last year ATRI published the findings from its first hours-of-service study, “Safety
Impacts of the New Hours of Service,” analyzing the safety effects of
the 2004 rules. The study compared the data with previous hours-of-service
rules that had governed driver health, safety and carrier productivity for
decades. This research found that the 2004 driver work and rest rules generated
significant improvements in driver safety performance.
Top
The Frontline Approach to
Driver Retention Show Drivers You Care
Rarely a week goes by that we, at Motor Transport Underwriters, aren’t being
asked by a client for ideas to help improve driver recruiting. My first
response is why are drivers leaving and what are you doing to retain your
existing personnel? Many times there is an awkward silence on the other end of
the line. High driver turnover seems to be a condition inherent to the
industry. However, it baffles me why we accept this as an inevitable fact of
life in trucking.
Approximately 70% of the companies we see simply do not have an adequate
mechanism in place to retain existing drivers. Yet, great resources are
expended to keep new driver orientation classes full with a steady stream of
fresh faces. Sometimes I think there is a subconscious feeling in the industry
that it may be easier to find new drivers than retain existing personnel.
However, driver retention can be drastically improved with moderate effort and
the establishment of a Driver Care initiative.
Finding Out Why the Driver Leaves
The first step towards solving any problem is first identifying the
root cause. Most companies we see simply do not have reliable data on why
drivers leave. Granted, it may be difficult talking face to face with a driver
when they decide to quit on the road. However, why not follow-up by phone
within the week and ask the driver why the company did not meet their needs.
This information will prove invaluable in formulating a driver retention plan.
I have worked with clients that have even gotten drivers back through such a
conversation.
This process is, however, reactive. How do we use this information to improve
driver turnover before it happens? In most cases we find some type of
operations-related issue caused the driver departure. This can be anything from
too little freight to a disagreement with a dispatcher or driver manager.
Drivers also have personal issues that may lead to their leaving.
Partnership between Driver and Driver Manager
An often over-looked key to driver retention is the driver manager or
dispatcher. These individuals are the primary link between the company and
driver. They may speak several times a day with the driver. Each interaction
has the potential of either causing yet another driver departure or fostering a
long-term relationship. By following these simple steps your front-line
operations personnel can greatly reduce the need for new driver recruits.
First, a partnership must be encouraged between the driver and manager or
dispatcher. In order to achieve this, each driver must be assigned to a
specific dispatcher. This allows for consistency and over time, a solid working
relationship that will make your operation more efficient and profitable while
improving retention.
The next step is to properly train and support operations personnel. Oftentimes
driver frustrations begin with poor communication or the feeling they are not
important to the company. Frontline personnel must be trained to effectively
communicate information the driver needs to do his or her job. Most
importantly, they must be trained to listen. The dispatcher must become the
eyes and ears for the company when it comes to driver management and retention.
They must also know how to recognize changes in a driver’s behavior that could
signal a potential problem. These could include personal problems, family
issues, health concerns or just a general change in the driver’s attitude. We
have known for some time personal distractions contribute to accident frequency
and severity. In studying drivers who left companies, many times these types of
issues also led to the departure. Most frustrating is the fact a simple
accommodation, such as a day off, could have saved the driver.
Training for Operations and Upper-Management
We usually start the training process with an initial seminar for
operations and management personnel. It is then important for the education to
continue through periodic meetings or refresher training to keep the goals in
the forefront. This also allows operations personnel to formally share ideas on
how to continually improve the program. This better promotes ownership among
the dispatch personnel.
Many times we have seen great ideas or programs initiated within organizations.
However, the company fails to build an adequate support structure to support
this Driver Care initiative. A formal mechanism must be created and supported
to take this information provided by the frontline personnel and actually do
something about it. The individual or team charged with this responsibility may
also have to determine the validity of some of these concerns.
There are also times when the driver may have a problem or issue that involves
the dispatcher or driver manager. If the issue cannot first be resolved through
normal channels, they must have the option to communicate these concerns
directly to the Driver Care Team. In most companies
this does not have to be a fulltime position. Some organizations use
volunteers.
Once the structure has been set, there has to be a way to measure the success of
each dispatcher or driver manager. Many companies only measure and reward
production of frontline operations personnel. Aside from the obvious liability
defense problems this can cause, it doesn’t send the best message to personnel.
We like to see performance measures for dispatchers/driver managers include
driver turnover, accidents, log violations from company audits and roadside
driver out-of-service in addition to productivity. This promotes team building
and gives operations personnel encouragement to take responsibility for the
activities of the driver.
These are just some of the primary initiatives we use to start a Driver Care
program. As the program grows, it can also be expanded to bring drivers’
families into the mix. Operations and driver incentive programs can also be
structured to better promote the process.
The bottom line is we loose drivers because we do not do everything possible to
forge a bond between driver and company. These drivers generally aren’t leaving
the industry. They wander from company to company looking to have their basic
needs met. Rebuilding an organization around meeting these needs will indeed
lead to a more efficient and profitable organization. In the process
organizations will also reap the benefits of improved customer service,
regulatory compliance and accident experience.
For More Information on the Motor Transport Underwriters “Driver Care” program
please contact Jeff Davis at 1-800-809-3660 ext. 2034 or by email at
jdavis@mtuinc.com.
Top
|