Silver
LAst February, a prepared concrete truck driver leading to Intersate 60 in Mesa, Ariz. The workers spread, showed the video of the accident, but one of them, Jordan Curtis, was hit by the truck and threw several feet. He suffered serious injuries that landed him in the hospital.
In the long history of building heavy vehicle use, favorite methods of preparing truck drivers for dangers, such as blinds and long stops of stoppage, have included meticulous, telematic training sessions that record the operation of the vehicle and cameras to increase the field of view of drivers. But a more recent method, in the cameras that record the driver’s actions, has caused controversy as to whether the unbridling eye of the camera is an invasion of privacy.
Is there a future for these cameras in construction? Recent studies show that they can help them if they are properly used.
The truck industry has also used driver -oriented cameras for a long time. In 2012, after the Canadian Trucks Company Sysco Quebec began installing them, the union representing their drivers opposed and, in arbitration, drivers prevailed. The Quebec Superior Court coincided with the drivers in appeal to Sysco Quebec and the cameras remained outside their trucks.
In the United States, two years later, California Attorney General Kamala Harris decided that the driver -oriented cameras were not a civil rights violation and that they could be used to discipline employees.
However, the National Board of Labor Relations had filed several demands by drivers against companies that used the cameras. Last year, the Council lost a case where a driver supported the supervisor he warned that he did not have to cover a surveillance camera in his truck’s cabin. To Stern Produce Company Inc. Against NLRB, Wahington’s Federal Appeal Court, DC, annulled the decision, and found that Stern Produce did not violate the federal labor law by warning the driver not to cover a driver’s camera during his pause.
The court He found that since the company’s policy was to have cameras at all times, the trucker’s rights were not violated by the supervisor’s reprimand.
The camera controversy has inflamed Trucker Online Chat forums, with the drivers who are alerted to which companies require cameras and which ones do not. Companies have hesitated to use them in a market for construction driver employees.
Can construction companies increase safety?
A driver enters an aggregate plant. Photo: Getty Images
The cameras “can offer valuable safety and training benefits, but they also propose valid concerns,” says Lisa Lamons, driver coach and Dot Dot Dot de Concrete Strategies, a national concrete contractor. One of the main problems is the driver’s perception, according to her, because drivers “feel that they are under constant surveillance, which causes distraction from the driver behind the wheel when their main task focuses on being aware of their environment while driving safely.”
Recent research shows the problem and potential solutions. One of the important solutions is events based recordings, which automatically erase any recording unless there is an incident or event, such as hard braking or speed. When there are no events, recordings are usually stored for a specified period of time before over writing.
Events -based cameras were preferred by continuous recording by drivers, legal experts, and insurers, as the research showed. One of the advantages is that this system reduces irrelevant images. And the driver’s approval increased when the registered footage for security, coaching and training programs was used.
A report from the Transportation Research Institute in the United States recommends limiting access to registered images to security directors, transparent policies and prioritizing positive training to create confidence.
Reduction of legal exposure
The cameras significantly reduce the exposure and legal responsibility of an entrepreneur, and the institute’s study was also found. Another advantage is that cameras exonerate drivers of 49% of lawsuits, according to legal experts consulted for the study, although there is a risk that some images can be used against drivers.
The insurers reported claims from 10% to 45% when used driver -oriented cameras with proactive training. The settlements also reached faster, the authors of the transport institute found.
For the construction employer, this means less accidents that have heavy equipment, a liability reduced by incidents to the workplace and an improved driver behavior.
Another study, of what was called heavy goods vehicles, was carried out in England and was published in Accidents Analysis & Prevention magazine in 2020. He examined fleets from more than 250 to two separate companies and analyzed data collected by companies and compared what happened with follow -up with the cameras for the driver and without them.
The cameras significantly reduced risk behaviors, according to the journal’s authors. In Company 1, the harsh braking incidents decreased by 16.82% and the speed of 34.29%, while company 2 experienced reductions of 4.62% and 28.13%, respectively. Drivers who were monitored by cameras and trained had significant reductions in hard braking compared to monitoring by Camera alone.
Training drivers, along with continuous coaching, seem to be the key to successfully using driver -oriented cameras.
For larger construction fleets, where the damage and risk of responsibility of the teams are high, these two studies show that the driver -oriented cameras savings could amount to millions annually, justifying the investment and the possible difficulties in gaining the confidence of the drivers. But they must be wisely introduced as part of a general safety plan and continuous training for drivers.
California correspondent, Elaine Silver, who writes on business, legal and safety problems, can be reached at esilver.enr@proton.me.
