Occupational Road Risk - Why Act?

Why do only very few businesses...

  • carry out a thorough H&S assessment to minimise occupational road risk - despite the fact that legislation requires it?
  • make ‘occupational road risk' an issue that is given the attention it deserves by management and business owners, especially when they themselves may be personally liable?
  • have a road risk reduction programme, despite the fact that their staff at being put at risk?

Probably because they

  • simply have not thought about or considered the real risk of not giving this the due attention it requires by law or deserves
  • don't know where to start
  • don't see the financial benefits

Businesses that don't act

  • in failing to provide the appropriate ‘duty of care' are not only breaking the law but are missing an opportunity to reduce vehicle costs and possibly damage the reputation of their business
  • are gambling with the lives of their staff
  • may potentially lose a key member of staff and have to deal with the subsequent effect on the business and low moral of the staff as a result
  • legal implication for Directors

So why act?

The Duty of Care & Legal Argument

  • Under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 employers have a statutory duty. They are required - ‘ to carry out an assessment of the risks to the health and safety of their employees ' and that includes 'any driving activity on the road'
  • Some businesses have opted out of offering the traditional company car to employees believing that moving to a cash-for-car, personal contract purchase scheme or employee car ownership scheme removes their health and safety responsibilities but it doesn't.
  • PUWER (the provision and use of work equipment regulations 1998) there are duties on employers to ensure that in relation to all work equipment provided for use, or used for the company undertaking, that it is  suitable for use, and for the purpose and conditions in which it is to be used; maintained in a safe condition for use so that people’s health and safety is not at risk; and inspected, in certain circumstances, to ensure that it is and continues to be safe for use. Any inspection should be carried out by a competent person (this could be an employee if they have the necessary skills, knowledge and experience to perform the task)

The Moral & Society Responsibiliity Argument

  • Driving is, without doubt, the most dangerous work-related activity performed by most people in Britain. It is estimated that a third of road deaths involve people driving on business which makes the moral argument demanding that companies take measures to safeguard the lives of their staff and other road users compelling.

The Economic Savings argument

The savings attributable to a risk management programme can be considerable:

  • a reduction in insurance premiums of at least 15% depending on previous claims record, fleet size and composition
  • fuel consumption improvements of at least 7%
  • reductions of at least 5% in wear and tear on tyres, brakes and clutches etc
  • improved vehicle value of a minimum of 4% if a trained driver drives the car
  • fewer accidents
  • less need for investigation
  • less administration
  • less lost time
  • less requirement for work rescheduling
  • lower training costs
  • fewer missed orders/sales opportunities
  • improved staff morale
  • improved public image
  • protection from prosecution

So what are the potential consequences for the business as a whole?

Today, the police treat the scene of a fatal road collision as an ‘unlawful killing' and, if appropriate, may interview the employee, managers and directors. Under today's legislation, if the company's actions, or lack of them, is deemed to have contributed to the incident, company representatives may be charged with manslaughter.

As well as the personal risk and stress, the reputation of the company as a whole may be threatened.

Corporate Manslaughter - Death caused by the actions or reactions of a company or its employees whilst undertaking their business in a way which could be considered as gross negligence or  failure to do their job correctly.  The organisation concerned must have owed a “relevant duty of care” to the victim.

The service we can provide includes

  • Road Risk Management & Assessment
  • Driver Profiling
  • Advanced Driver Licence Testing
  • Driver Risk Awareness Training
  • Safe driving policies - for businesses who use vehicles and have more than 5 employees

Find out more by calling 01275 390001 or contacting us today


Our Diverse Range of Clients include:

  • owner drivers to multi-national hauliers
  • national charities to Government enterprises
  • all sectors from food distribution & groundworks to art galleries & road management companies

Qualifications and Memberships

  • RSA Certificate of Professional Competence (CPC Holder)
  • Class One LGV licence with over 25 years practical experience
  • IOSH qualified (Institute of Occupational Safety & Health)
  • Graduate in Transport Management & Economics
  • Freight Transport Association
  • Chartered Institute of Logistics & Transport
  • Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development
  • Federation of Small Businesses
  • Break.org.uk
  • Driver CPC Training
 
Copyright © 2017 TMS Bristol Limited - All Rights Reserved | Built by Bluebell Web Design Ltd |  Manage Site