Critical Safety and Compliance

By Dave Elniski, BSc, CTSP, CRSP, Industry Advisor in Safety and Compliance, Alberta Motor Transport Association

Canadian and U.S. trucking and busing companies follow similar safety laws. While significant differences exist between the two countries – and between the provinces and states within each country – these laws require carriers to implement safety programs with four basic pillars:

• Driver competency

• Hours-of-service (HOS) management

• Equipment maintenance

• Safety program administration

We find carrier safety staff often emphasize the importance of compliance, and for good reason: Canada and U.S. safety regulations form excellent safety standards which, if followed, significantly reduce the risk to professional drivers and the motoring public. Oftentimes, compliance becomes the ultimate goal, and safety managers stop seeing legislation as a minimum performance standard but instead as the height of achievement.

However, compliance-only as an approach to fleet safety management doesn’t foster safety innovation. Imagine the task facing transportation safety policymakers: they must create an actionable framework of rules to apply to all types of vehicles and operations throughout an incredibly diverse geography, in an ever-evolving industry. The fruits of their labor deserve respect and strict adherence while still being understood as a minimum performance standard. When seen this way, a safety department can be viewed as a solution and an innovation center — not, as they sometimes are when being disparaged by other parts of an organization, as a hindrance to new ways of doing business.

This is not to minimize compliance and paint it as an easy goal. Good audit scores and clean roadside inspection reports deserve recognition and celebration; the realities of the industry and the intricacies of the rules make running a compliant company an active, challenging task. Or consider the rollout of electronic logging devices (ELDs) or the Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse. When new programs and requirements enter the industry, basic compliance can be challenging. Learning requires time.

Interesting things start to happen when we see safety departments as being able to make their own decisions within the existing arcs of compliance. A carrier can implement fatigue management best practices while still following the HOS rules, and ELD data can be used to improve trip planning while complying with Canadian and U.S. ELD regulations. A driver’s file can be used to track positive feedback from customers and law enforcement as well as retain driving records and previous employment history. Maintenance records can be used to identify appropriate preventative practices at operationally friendly intervals for specific equipment while still satisfying audit requirements and ensuring driver-spotted defects get corrected.

Compliant drivers and safety departments should be proud of their accomplishments but should not forget that they can improve upon a regulator’s safety rules by critically examining how those rules are applied within their specific operations. Safety innovation leads to best practices, which light the way for other carriers who share the goal of helping all road users arrive safely at their final destinations.