SynX Blog

The focus on dashboard cameras continues to be important after an insurance company has announced that discounts will be offered in Ireland on a regular basis to customers wishing to combine a dashboard camera with their insurance policy.

According to a recent survey carried out by GoCompare, drivers actually welcome the use of dashboard cameras, which have proved to be a great tool for fleet and driver safety, as they can assist with monitoring driving style and help staff to become safer drivers, but can also be crucial in the event of a collision by providing video evidence.

The GoCompare survey discovered that around a third of the drivers interviewed claimed dashboard cameras should be fitted as a compulsory item in the cars and vehicles of the future. This fraction of the interviewed, corresponding to 32%, complements the 48% who claimed to be happy to have dashcams installed on board. There seems to be quite a high consensus when it comes to dashcams use as only 8% claimed they would not like to have a dashcam installed. The main concerns for this minority appear to be with the potential for distraction and the perception that the installation would be a hassle.

At the same time, news has been published according to which a new two-year action plan from the UK’s Department of Transport has been released in order to encourage the elimination of dangerous driving and road rage and to stimulate cooperation between the different road users. The attempt is also aimed at reducing traffic and improving air quality.

The plan of action will hopefully minimise dangerous parking and promote respectful driving when interacting with cyclists as well; but these are not the only points, as it seems the police force will be able to count on a new back office that will provide an opportunity to analyse video evidence (dashcam footage included) submitted by the public.

The objective is to bring about a general improvement in road safety and protect users that are more at risk such as cyclists or pedestrians.

Photo Credit: By Fernost - Own work, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=29835936

Personal Contract Hire (PCH) has recently proven to be a very effective solution for small companies in need of vehicles for a definite period of time (despite being primarily addressed to private users); for example, when seasonality comes into play and companies face busier days and are not willing or not able to cope with a vehicle purchase or with business contract leasing due to lack of funds, longer contracts, higher responsibilities or just in order to follow a strategy which uses funds differently.

There is no right or wrong answer to the question as to whether companies should use PCH or leasing instead of acquiring new vehicles, as it rather depends on the activity, seasonality and objectives of a specific business: sometimes PCH or traditional business leasing could be the perfect answer to their requirements, but maybe not so much on other occasions. It might also depend on the type of vehicle a particular business might be looking for, as the choice is usually limited and more focused on cars or vans rather than on construction vehicles, for example. But it seems that Personal Contract Hire or PCH is actually a good solution for some companies whose business depends on driving, as the trend towards this option is increasing. According to the British Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association (BVRLA), the trade body for the vehicle rental and leasing sector, the trend towards PCH has grown steadily for both vans and cars in the period from 2012 to 2015, and grew by 14% in the first quarter of 2018. PCH seems no longer to be a prerogative of personal use, as more and more businesses start to turn towards it, though it certainly has some downsides.

With the general tendency for businesses toward vehicle sharing for their driving needs, PCH might actually be capable of accommodating changing requirements, as, according to some experts, vehicle ownership will definitely decrease in the future. But when we consider the increasing demand for leased vehicles, there are still lots of factors we need to look at. Compliance and maintenance seem to be the two aspects most fleets would rather not think about: but it is actually a fact that having a similar type of contract to the more traditional arrangements might lead to a clash of responsibilities and maybe to drivers not taking the appropriate care of maintenance, since around 20% of the PCH agreements, for example, do not include maintenance expenses according to research recently carried out by Epyx, a technology solution provider.

This might lead to some obvious problems, because if the company providing the PCH agreement is not taking care of maintenance, it creates some uncertainty upon the status of the vehicles and what their remarketing value will be when it comes to the end of the contract. Employers adopting PCH agreements as part of their fleets will use those vehicles for business, but will struggle to find out if they are actually maintained according to the necessary standards and if they meet compliance requirements. The employer is usually responsible for the duty of care obligations, so how could companies avoid an information deficit and find a way to implement sound maintenance practices so that the PCH provider, the company and the driver share the same information?

Having an independent maintenance system that could be checked by all parties is definitely a sound means of preventing possible miscommunication between all those parties. If you wish to know how this could be done, check out our SynX Maintain option.

Our latest article from the A to Z of fleet management series is directed at some of the more inconspicuous stakeholders. And as such, we are pretty sure we will catch the attention of those who often work in this important area, but are usually “behind the scenes”. Yes, health and safety officers, we are talking about you!

Health and safety, or, in other words, occupational health and safety, or again workplace health and safety, is concerned with the effect that the specific workplace environment and the tasks required in the day-to-day running of a business has upon anyone with which it comes into contact, and this applies wherever it is operating in a commercial capacity: this includes employees, possibly family members, customers or a more extended group of people. Take a moment to consider how this applies for businesses that operate vehicles.

Dealing with the protection of employees and other categories of people does not only involve a series of preventive actions to be implemented in order to prevent the health and safety of those involved being compromised, but those actions also need to be informed by the regulations that specifically apply to that particular sector, task, category of worker and, of course, depends on the country where the business is operating. This is why when we consider health and safety we are also considering legal compliance.

But what’s the story with health and safety officers? It seems in a lot of cases, as happens with fleet managers, when it comes to smaller businesses, health and safety officers with specific workplace health and safety responsibilities do not in fact exist. Conversely, for larger companies that have a greater pool of vehicles, there is usually a dedicated health and safety officer who is also partly sharing responsibilities with a fleet director. Particularly in these cases, the health and safety officer is a sort of a legal reference for the company and can best advise when new regulations come into effect or when different processes are being adopted by a company and they are expected to oversee whether they adhere to local/global law and health and safety at work regulations. In smaller companies, the person responsible for the role in absence of a dedicated health and safety officer is often the owner, the fleet director in some cases or the human resources department.

When it comes to decision-making about health and safety, it is very unlikely that health and safety officers alone implement processes that involve risk assessment, training or best practices that should be integrated into work practices. There is generally cooperation within all departments, so the contribution of the health and safety officer is key to understanding what can legally be done in some cases, but in others management might want to prevail over some choices, even though their directives might not be fully compliant.

Running vehicles at work should instead be regarded with the utmost importance as it continues to be one of the most frequent causes of injuries or fatalities. About half of the incidents reported to happen in transport in the workplaces every year still make up an extremely significant percentage and seems to indicate that the role and advice of the health and safety officer is still not taken seriously enough. Sites and workplace, drivers and vehicles need to be managed in the safest way possible while complying with the existing legislation. As usual, if you are not clear how this can be realised, don’t hesitate to contact us.

Dashboard cameras are becoming more and more commonplace and companies who aim at improving the safety of their employees and want an extra level of precaution are starting to implement them within their fleets. Up until now, insurance companies had not openly supported the use of dash cams, but that is all about to change.

According to an online article published in the Independent on the 18th of November, the insurance company Axa has offered a 10% discount on premiums for customers who install a dash cam. Axa Ireland has partnered up with the camera manufacturer Nextbase who will provide the necessary dash cams, also for a discount, when bought through high-street retailers such as Halfords. It is extremely likely that other insurance companies will now follow suit with similar offers to encourage drivers and fleets to install dash cams on their vehicles.

This development was reported in Ireland, where it seems to be strongly connected to a series of joint strategies by the Gardaí, the Irish police force, which shares responsibilities in road safety with the RSA (Road Safety Authority) of Ireland. Recently, the road safety team has coordinated a series of actions aimed at tackling the issue of uninsured drivers in Ireland, which is currently calculated to be 150,000 cases. In order to solve the issue, a special system has been setup so that Gardaí will be able to immediately see if a vehicle is insured or not by means of special handheld devices. The system will depend upon a national database of cars and insurance cover and is expected to be up and running by the end of 2018.

In the UK, the first insurance company to establish some sort of favourable terms for customers who have dash cams fitted seems to have come from Swiftcover back in 2014, and some other insurance companies have subsequently followed their example.

But what about the other benefits of dash cams? Notwithstanding the discounts, fitting a vehicle with a dash cam can make a huge difference for both end users and companies who rely on drivers: according to studies held in the UK by the RAC, 25% of the interviewed on the matter claim that dash cam footage would be extremely helpful in improving driving style. Dash cams are also pretty useful when it comes to establishing the ultimate responsibility for a collision or an incident, as you can often get conclusive evidence of how an incident plays out over time. Moreover, if you are entitled to a no-claims discount, a dash cam could help you retain it if the responsibility of the other drivers is proved via the footage.

According to the AA’s director of Consumer Affairs, Conor Faughnan (interviewed in April by the Independent): “Where they are useful [dash cams], though, is in settling liability after the fact. They can be very useful in resolving disputes or establishing exactly how a crash occurred and in reducing fake crashes or insurance scams”. The move by Axa seems also to be part of the wider plan to eliminate fraudulent injury claims.

Dash cams can definitely help your driving team and fleet to improve their global safety and reduce the costs to your business (not necessarily only those related to insurance). If you want to learn more, we are here to help.

The rise of Black Friday is no longer simply a popular phenomenon, it has become the inspiration for labelling other noteworthy business occasions. For example, collateral events such as Cyber Monday (the “cousin” of Black Friday) and Green Monday (which is actually referring to the December Monday generating most sales—also known as Cyber Monday 2) make the season kicking off tomorrow one of the most critical periods for any type of business, as it has been calculated that it can account for as much as 30% of annual sales.

Retailers and parcel delivery companies pay special attention to the beginning of the holiday season, and the strong growth of online shopping is quite promising: potentially every sector is expecting a record shopping season.

If we want to look at some relevant data, the National Retail Federation in the US is expecting the sales happening in the holiday season period, that is, starting with Black Friday and continuing through the Christmas period, to increase by around 4-5% from last year to a global value of something like $680 billion dollars (£529 billion or €603 billion). According to the same source, potentially 136 million holiday shoppers will be active during the Black Friday weekend.

Forbes expects Christmas sales to increase by about 5%, with peaks close to a $2 billion spend on Black Friday and $2.5 billion on Cyber Monday. According to an infographic dating back to last year, 225,000,000 extra parcels are delivered on Black Friday and translate to an extra 82,050 vehicles on the road and 49,000 more staff to be hired. Some of the big names that are expected to excel in their performance in particular during this period in the UK and Ireland are Amazon, Argos and Royal Mail. Black Friday parcels do indeed need resources and efforts in order to reach consumers and huge plans are needed for any type of business to fit and succeed in the “Black Friday machine”.

Logistics is definitely what really makes everything possible at this time of the year. Despite the digitalisation of most sectors, it is a fact that as per now, envelopes and parcels still have to be delivered and pressure is often kept on destination delivery companies, with custom clearance from faraway places adding extra days to the original shipping estimate. It is then not surprising that professionals involved in the supply chain and logistic sectors and also fleet experts spend a considerable amount of time analysing data, thinking about speeding up processes and getting ready for this time.

Make sure you plan well in advance for your business during this time: dealing with Black Friday business can become stressful and challenging, with a considerable impact on safety, vehicle and personnel demand, but it can really represent a huge opportunity if you are able to catch it in time. It is also one of the most predictable high turnover periods of the year, so make sure you are helping your driving and office team with intelligent tools able to save time on admin and maximise driving time. If you are not sure how, we can show you how to make the most out of Black Friday—and, in fact, out of any other time of the year.

In order to set up a good strategy for companies to cope with the risks associated with their vehicle/fleet activity, driving style monitoring is a great starting point as it allows the capture of driver behaviour that might be unsafe or inefficient and therefore in need of correction. If this is combined with an ongoing driver behaviour programme, it can not only make the difference regarding the safety of your fleet but also to your fuel consumption.

This principle seems logical enough to those who understand the potential of driving style monitoring, but despite this making so much sense, are fleet management or those responsible for vehicles really taking positive action in order to improve driver behaviour?

According to a recent survey shared by Fleet News, it seems companies openly focus on fleet safety but do not actually take action when it comes to driver behaviour monitoring, though this is typical of some fleets and not valid for all of them. The employers of 55+ years in particular, who manage professional drivers, seem to place little importance on driver behaviour management—54% of them do not take any action at all where this is concerned. Interestingly enough, 18-34 year olds with the same type of responsibility are a completely different story—only 6% of the interviewed do not enact driver behaviour monitoring. All in all, it seems younger managers are more likely to employ technology, or in any case tackle this aspect.

According to the same research, it seems companies are more worried about cyber security, which proved to be a concern for 63% of the interviewed, while road safety seems to worry less business representatives, an issue for 57% of the interviewed. A change of attitude is probably needed, and it appears that those who have been in the business for some time might not immediately rely on new technologies.

Other research carried out by the Universities of Lisbon and Coimbra focusses on the results provided by companies offering real-time driving behaviour feedback and no feedback at all. The 2017 study, targeting a public transport bus provider, focusses on particularly dangerous or inefficient driving styles including hard starts, hard stops, extreme braking, extreme acceleration, idling, excessive revving and speeding. Vehicles have been monitored in three phases: during the first and third, drivers have been provided with real-time feedback on their manner of driving, while in the second period they have not been provided with feedback at all.

According to the study, the bus company (and, eventually, the driver) benefited from receiving real-time feedback and modified their conduct behind the wheel, while the incidences of unsafe or inefficient driving behaviour increased when they received no feedback, only to be reduced again when the real-time feedback on their driving style resumed.

The results of this research affirms the idea that, if done in an intelligent way, driver behaviour monitoring can definitely help companies improve on safety and decrease fuel consumption if drivers embrace the scrutiny and adopt safer behaviours over time, while the ability of maintaining them seems to decrease with time if action when necessary isn’t taken.

We are always talking about safety and how to deal with it—how to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the potential risks surrounding fleets and drivers—as something essential. It is undoubtedly never an easy task  (well, maybe  for some companies more than others), but in some instances this is not just down to the fact that companies do not know how to approach this vital requirement, it is because responsibilities don’t always seems to be a hundred percent clear.

When we think about this for a moment, we might take a closer look at the ‘grey fleet’ sector to illustrate the point: despite vehicles not being actually owned by the company, they still fall under its purview, at least during the hours in service of that particular company (they might be privately owned as acquired through a particular employee scheme, for example). But what happens to those drivers who work in the so-called ‘gig economy’?

We assume you are not new to this term. If you are unsure, it basically means that drivers who work in the gig economy do not get a fixed salary but are rather paid for each completed ‘gig’, which in this case is a single ride, often assigned via an app. Gig economy driving has been the subject of ongoing controversy since the companies who provide the platform which makes the jobs available for workers (usually a smartphone app), are claiming this type of work simply provides the means for drivers to choose their own working hours. On the other hand, drivers are not strictly hired and it is claimed by these companies that they are in fact self-employed and the app simply provides a service for them to obtain work, hence why the health and safety responsibilities have become harder to pin down.

During the 8th annual conference on work related road safety, organised by the ETSC (European Transport Safety Council), Ms. Heather Ward from London’s UCL Centre of Transport Studies presented this as an important topic for the audience to consider: an evolving commercial scenario whereby safety training is distinctly lacking and responsibilities are opaque due to this particularly new type of working arrangement facilitated by the development of smartphone apps.

The UCL work team interviewed drivers and launched an online survey for those working in the gig economy and it emerged that those drivers had no risk training, are not given safety vests and can experience particularly intense pressures during peak times.

Another issue revealed the lack of time tracking for those working for more than one of these companies at a time, so potentially it is possible for those drivers to work for 12 hours without a break and do it for 2-3 weeks continuously. Some drivers claimed that having to use the app in order to get jobs while on the road was a source of distraction for them (since they need to keep their phone on in order to get these gigs) or that they have felt forced to speed or to park in areas where it is not allowed to make their deliveries.

The first set of data was officially published in an article by the tech section of the BBC at the end of August, where Ms. Ward and Ms. Christie, both involved in the research work, made a call for the government to regulate transport and impose stricter safety management in these cases.

When we think about a company’s expectations as to the performance of their selected fleet management system, or before they actually make the final choice, a lot of possible scenarios spring to mind—we usually imagine the sceptical company manager as the ideal candidate for one of our free trials through to the health and safety officer wishing to improve on global safety and compliance within his/her fleet. But perhaps we haven’t really given enough thought to how this may differ from the actual expectations people have regarding their fleet management systems as these are available in a wide series of formats and packages which guarantees, at least apparently, a huge variety of choice. So what should you expect when approaching your fleet management system solution?

#1 - Is less always more? When some companies approach their chosen fleet management system for the first time, they are sorely tempted to get as many features as possible. As the old adage goes, “less is (usually) more”—but is that actually true? We don’t think having tons of features or just a few is either the best or the worst strategy—and there should never be a one-size-fits-all approach. We believe that before listing all the features available that you focus specifically on what is actually needed for your fleet depending on its usual activity. Don’t be tempted by expensive features that you might never get to use, nor should you just discard anything just to make savings—probably the best approach is to have the system consultant help you out or run through a trial option.

#2 - The power of expectations bending reality. We tend to think that our expectations actually correspond closely to the future of our fleet, when sometimes they don’t at all, or on other occasions they can help us understand what we want from our provider. The secret is having a realistic approach; do a thorough analysis of the fleet and act according to the needs and requirements of the fleet and according to the experience you have gained.

#3 – Predicting the future. If you have a certain type of expectation from your fleet management system, it needs to take into consideration developments over the course of the next five years. Doing so will help you shape the system according to your requirements and without making mistakes, as you might actually be able to anticipate some of your future work or features and prepare for its adequate implementation.

#4 – Level of support required. Are you going to be helped on a regular basis by the fleet management system’s support team or not? Do you want to be able to count on their help? Do you assume the support is always going to be included in the payments? This is another expectation you’d better check with your provider.

#5 – Fleet data and data formats supported and provided. Here you have another point where you might actually have specific expectations, but this is something that is always better to check up on. Will you be able to get data for all the aspects you need? Should you set up specific tracking or metrics? Will the whole be exportable? The golden rule is to know in advance.

A fatal bus crash dating back to October 2015 which took place in Coventry city centre may push authorities into making a decision as to whether fleet telematics should become compulsory, at least for public service fleets and HGVs, according to the legal firm Stephenson’s.

Last month, the Birmingham Crown Court established that dangerous driving was the factual cause of the fatal collision which involved a bus from the company Midland Red South, a subsidiary of Stagecoach, which crashed into a local Sainsbury supermarket. From the investigations carried out, it seems the driver mistook his accelerator for the brake, initiating the collision which resulted in the death of a passenger who was travelling on the upper deck and a pedestrian.

According to a reconstruction of the event, it turned out that the driver in question had been warned on multiple occasions by the same companies via letters highlighting his risky behaviour and poor driving; and this was down to the fact that all buses were fitted with telematics equipment and could therefore disclose this kind of information. A total of eight warning letters had been sent to the driver, but no further action was taken by his company. It has been revealed that the same driver had already been involved in four other incidents during the period 2011 to 2014.

Apparently, he had retired at the age of 65 but was again hired by the company as a casual driver at the age of 77. Furthermore, it is alleged that the driver, Kailash Chander, had been working for a total of 75 hours per week in the three weeks leading up the fatal crash; something that is actually legal according to GB Domestic Rules, but probably not appropriate for a person of his age. Chander was also diagnosed with dementia at an early stage after the crash.

As the driver was judged mentally unfit to attend the trial, Stagecoach pleaded guilty to the charge relating to the Health and Safety at Work Act in September 2017 and will be sentenced on November 26th. According to public opinion, it is incredible that Stagecoach continued to allow this particular driver to work despite his age and the stark fact that his unsafe driving practices were detected by the telematics system. In this particular case, the operator has been prosecuted for not maintaining safety despite the tracking system revealing driver behaviour issues.

This might be an example of how telematics itself definitely helps with the implementation of a risk assessment program, but it is completely pointless if companies do not act fully upon the data they receive from vehicles and act before it is too late. Operators should use data in a proactive way, especially when they are repeatedly informed of a driver who is particularly at risk, as was the case in this instance. Traffic commissioners and transport organisations still do not consider telematics a compulsory feature of fleet operation, but similar accidents in the future may actually prompt governments to make it so.

The ETSC (European Transport Safety Council) has recently issued a new report focussing on the role of fleet telematics in the improvement of risk assessment for companies whose commercial activity depends on vehicles. The study, entitled “Using Telematics In Professional Vehicle Fleets” was published October, 2018 and focusses on the positive role of this technology for companies dependent on vehicles.

According to numbers published by the ETSC, more than 25,000 people lost their lives during the whole of 2017 on European roads and around 135,000 suffered injuries deriving from collisions. All in all, it has been estimated that around 40% of the people involved in those accidents were driving for work: 40% of the fatal collisions were in fact work-related.

Governments have taken different measures towards safer roads, adapting their legislation and helping road safety organisations to implement new schemes and programmes with the common aim of reducing those numbers. In this environment, the use of fleet telematics as systems able to capture vehicle data is no longer seen as a tool providing evidence only in the event of a collision, because of its ability to reconstruct what happened leading up to it, but is increasingly being used to monitor driver behaviour. Telematics offers a wide array of data that can potentially be used not only as a risk management tool, but also to identify fleet-wide issues or to improve the sales side of a business.

According to the ETSC, this powerful tool can minimise risks within a fleet by adopting different types of approaches:

• Some road safety issues can in fact be global, such as speeding, which has an impact on both professional drivers and any other road user.
  
• Then there are driver-specific issues that relate to a particular member of staff and can be monitored in real time. Strengths, weaknesses and areas of concern can be worked on for all drivers, and the publication makes the specific example of drivers particularly prone to speeding or less than perfect driving which might be attributed to poor eyesight.
  
• Finally, some issues highlighted within the fleet might actually be related to the wider company and help with the organisation of business practices through policies or the implementation of superior processes; for example, in the loading and unloading of vehicles, the prevention of idling and fatigue and in order to identify risky patterns.
  
  

To make the best use of telematics data, the ETSC publication offers a number of suggestions:

• Collecting data should be carried out correctly and regularly. The data obtained thanks to the technology available might be converted into a more relevant format for drivers, and such collections should be done on a regular basis over a reasonable length of time so as to fully realise the benefits of the system. The continuous collection of data and its analysis will not only help implement positive improvements but also assess behaviours and eventually modify them if inappropriate.
  
• It is important to have a risk assessment programme that focusses on the most important issues and that does not let the benefits go due to the abundance of data available.
  
  
• Regarding data protection, it is important that the implementation of telematics follows the legal guidelines of the country where it is implemented and pays special attention to the drivers. Staff need to be informed about the data collected, the potential use of it and should be in a position to discuss this usage.
  
  

• It is fundamental that everyone in the business is involved in the telematics process and shares joint responsibility for its success, as a team.