Industry Perception Task Overview

1
Industry Perception Task Overview
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

• Presented byJeff SecristOctober 24, 2006

2
Overview

• Task Overview
• Workshop Locations
• Who Attended?
• Feedback
• Current Technologies
• Cost Implications Regarding New Technologies
• Information Sharing
• Roadside

3
Task Overview

• Collect industry feedback through facilitated
  discussion pertaining to
• Experiences with existing safety-based programs
• Improving features/capabilities of safety-based
  programs through technology
• FMCSAs role in further improving motor carrier
  safety
• State-level role in furthering safety
  initiatives
• Industrys role and participation in safety-based
  programs

4
Workshop Locations

• Albany, NY New York State Motor Truck
  Association, July 11, 2006
• Session organized by the association on FMCSAs
  behalf
• Denver, CO Colorado Motor Truck Association,
  August 3, 2006
• Monthly Safety Council Meeting
• Columbia, SC South Carolina Trucking
  Association, August 19, 2006
• Monthly Safety Council Meeting

5
Participant Make-up By Location

• Albany, NY
• Small gathering, three individuals representing
  two companies.
• Denver, CO
• Over 30 carriers were present for the Monthly
  Safety Council Meeting, with more than half
  staying for the Industry Perception Session
• Columbia, SC
• Approximately 20 carriers in attendance. The
  meeting was held in conjunction with the Monthly
  Safety Council meeting, the Industry Perception
  Presentation was the primary agenda topic

6
Feedback Current Technologies

• Participants in all three sessions indicated they
  currently use some form of monitoring devices in
  their organization for fleet management purposes
• GPS technology was the mostly commonly utilized
  the most common reasons noted for using the
  technology include
• Improved efficiency reducing phone calls between
  drivers and dispatchers
• Assistance with route and trip planning
• Assistance with the monitoring of drivers
• Log book monitoring
• Payroll purposes tracking driver hours versus
  log book entries
• All participants currently using monitoring
  devices indicated initial resistance from drivers
  which have dissipated over time

7
Feedback Current Technologies (continued)

• Participants offered insight into other uses for
  GIS technology including provision of a panic
  button for security purposes
• Mapping the rate of speed at which the vehicle is
  traveling versus posted limits was discussed as a
  potential use of technology
• Participants reported use of transponders for
  both electronic toll collection and electronic
  screening purposes
• Participants utilizing transponders for
  electronic screening indicated recognized benefit
  in cost and time savings through bypass at weigh
  stations

8
Feedback Current Technologies (continued)

• Use of transponders to track uninsured drivers
  was offered as a potential future use of
  transponder technologies
• Recommendation was made that FMCSA follow-up with
  the insurance industry on this topic
• Participants raised interest in seeing more
  utilization of technology for safety applications
  targeted towards
• Driver awareness
• Fatigue
• Driver wellness issues
• Detection awareness/warning systems
• Animal hits

9
Feedback Cost Implications

• Cost benefit justification was a key factor for
  all participants
• Participants currently not utilizing any
  technology indicated hesitance that the cost of
  implementation would be justified by the benefit
  outcome
• Participants utilizing technologies indicated
  benefits received have been significant and are
  reflected in their operational bottom lines
• Participants indicated FMCSA should pursue
  incentives to leverage carriers decision/ability
  to install technologies
• Until the playing field is leveled these types of
  programs will be met with varied resistance

10
Feedback Cost Implications (continued)

• Participants noted the importance of selling
  technologies to drivers by convincing them tools
  are user friendly and advantageous
• Tracking and routing
• Speed controls
• Paperwork reduction
• Log recording
• Participants noted support of FMCSAs
  effort/regulations to improve Safety
• Participants welcome any tool which can assist
  their organization perform better

11
Feedback Information Sharing

• Participants were open to the idea of improved
  information sharing
• Difficulty of easily obtaining information
  (especially for hiring purposes) was a key
  concern
• Privacy issues and use of information were
  central themes in discussions
• Current difficulty in finding good drivers may be
  further complicated by initiatives set forth by
  FMCSA

12
Feedback Information Sharing (continued)

• Information misuse is an area of concern to
  industry
• Data accuracy was noted as a key area of concern
  due to potential issue a driver could face as a
  result of inaccurate data
• Participants expressed interest in sharing the
  following driver information
• Criminal background checks
• Previous employment information
• Motor Vehicle Records
• Driving Records
• Drug and Alcohol testing results
• Warrants

13
Feedback Information Sharing (continued)

• Participants felt strongly if a driver snapshot
  were created it contain conviction and not
  citation data
• Participants noted their biggest challenge is the
  ability to hire good drivers absent the data to
  make sound decisions
• Participants noted if FMCSA is going to hold
  industry to a standard, FMCSA must do their part
  in providing necessary resources/tools to allow
  industry to meet the standards/expectations
• Participants noted that Federal, State and
  Industry all have a critical role in their daily
  functions to ensure that safety is a priority

14
Feedback - Roadside

• Across all three sessions, the idea of more
  efficiently identifying vehicles at the roadside
  was not met with much objection
• Participants did not endorse nor reject the idea
  of roadside identification the consensus was
  that they will abide by what the law requires.