I appreciate that The Guardian and more particularly it's op/ed writer Polly Toynbee are not favourites round here. Today's piece though may interest a few, not least our resident truckers:
tinyurl.com/hksxrnw
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 3 Aug 16 at 14:28
|
I read that online yesterday and couldn't believe so many errors in it and deliberat suggestions to alarm people.
For a start, dangerous lorries.
Compliance has never been higher than it is now and VOSA (or DVSA) as they are now are doing a brilliant job of targeted enforcement and leaving compliant hauliers alone.
There is a shortage of drivers but until the working week gets down to something like 40/50 hours like normal people from the 70/80 we do now we will never attract youngsters into the business. They don't want a life of work, they want a work life balance and quite right too.
We have a number of European drivers now and they are paid exactly the same as all of the other drivers....and they do the job without constantly moaning.
Polly Toynbee needs a reality chech and going out for a few days with a lorry driver might just do that for her.
Generally we're not seen as a pain on the road and I train my drivers that they get back what they give regarding considerate driving and politeness to delivery points.
Pat
|
There is a shortage of drivers but until the working week gets down to something
>> like 40/50 hours like normal people from the 70/80 we do now we will never
>> attract youngsters into the business. They don't want a life of work, they want a
>> work life balance and quite right too.
I thought the limit was 56 hours a week?
|
If you mean the Working Time Directive then any breaks or POA (Periods of availability = waiting in a queue to tip) don't count towards that.
If you mean driving time then yes, that is the amount we can actually drive in a week.
Pat
|
It was a while ago when i last looked at drivers hours. I know we are supposed to record our drivers hours in certain circumstances.
It is odd how its just driving hours rather than total working hours.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Wed 3 Aug 16 at 18:51
|
The problem is Sooty we have to work with two sets of legislation which are not easy to combine.
The WTD and EU drivers hours laws.
I probably didn't explain it well above but for the WTD it is total working hours but less any breaks or POA and you should be keeping a record.
If you need any help just drop me an email (in my profile) and give me a few more details.
Compliance is what I do!
Pat
|
Yes its odd that there are two sets of rules. I would have thought working hours would make more sense, since your still at work and it's not really your own spare free time.
Thanks for the offer, but hopefully, the requirement to record hours is getting removed. Especially since there is no legal requirement to do so, for us anyway.
|
>>The WTD and EU drivers hours laws.
Could some of these laws (especially the EU drivers laws) be redrafted in the Haulage Industries favour since Brexit?
|
>> >>The WTD and EU drivers hours laws.
>>
>> Could some of these laws (especially the EU drivers laws) be redrafted in the Haulage
>> Industries favour since Brexit?
>>
It would be interesting to get Pat's view on this, but personally I wouldn't wont lorry drivers to do more hours behind the wheel!
|
The hours could certainly be simplified and combined better after Brexit.
However I don't think they will be because it would only reduce the hours we could work and that would make the driver shortage even worse.
Drivers are mostly fine doing the hours behind the wheel that are allowed now Zippy but it's the other 5 hours around the driving which can consist of hard physical work which causes the tiredness.
So many problems would be solved in one single swoop if they reduced the maximum working day to 13 hours instead of 15 hours. Work/life balance for a start.
Ian starts most days at 2.30am or 3am. That means getting up at 1am or 1.30am to shower, have breakfast and travel 25 mins to work.
If he finishes at 5.30pm he doesn't get home before 18.15 because of daytime traffic. By the time we've eaten a meal it's time to go to bed for the merry go round to start again.
I know all lorry driving jobs aren't like general haulage in the distribution sector, but if you want to work for Jewsons from 7am to 5.30pm your wage is around 21000k:).
My drivers tomorrow will have started at around 1.30am and will come into the training room at 3pm to do 3.5 hours training, in their own time without pay.
This is compulsory and they cannot be employed by anyone without it. On Saturday morning they will be back at 6am for a further 3.5 hours again in their own time without pay.....this is what's wrong with the industry now.
Pat
|
Pat, I would imagine if your drivers have been driving since 1.30 am there is not a hope in hell's chance they will be paying attention in a training room 15 hours later?
I start yawning in training rooms usually within 15 mins.
|
>>I start yawning in training rooms usually within 15 mins<<
Not in mine you don't:)
I write my own courses Bobby so I can target the subjects to the times when they are most receptive. I have to constantly evaluate whether it is being taken in or not so my unconventional way of training does have to work.
Over the last 7 years we've seen vast improvements in a lot of areas so my two full biscuit tins seem to do their job!
Pat
|
|
I assume they then pass a test to show they have taken it all in at the end. If it's mandatory/compulsory training then there will be a test of some sort?
Last edited by: rtj70 on Fri 5 Aug 16 at 03:51
|
As I said >> I have to constantly evaluate whether it is being taken in or not <<
If you read the legislation you would see it doesn't allow tests or exams of any sort.
Pat
|
|
Sounds like something that could benefit from CBT too for refreshers. Could you look at creating such a course and selling it to other companies?
|
>> I start yawning in training rooms usually within 15 mins.
Me too. I used to fall asleep as well before I got my sleep apnoea under control ;)
|
|
Very interesting, but alarming.
|
Don't be alarmed Ambo, it is designed and worded to do exactly that.
In the real world of haulage (which, Polly Toynbee knows absolutely nothing about) it is nothing like she has portrayed.
She's done what Jeremy Vine does, rang around to find a lorry driver to interview with a grudge and a huge chip in his shoulder, and written her article based on that.
Pat
|
>> She's done what Jeremy Vine does, rang around to find a lorry driver to interview
>> with a grudge and a huge chip in his shoulder, and written her article based
>> on that.
>>
Journalists & media people of every political view do that regularly, why let truth get in the way of a good story
|
The article references a report as well as a driver. The parts of the report are linked to from www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/transport-committee/news-parliament-2015/road-haulage-sector-report-published-16-17/
It's a report by a Parliamentary Select Committee, the Transport Committee, who also probably don't get out there and get their hands dirty, but I'm sure they haven't just made up or sensationalised the facts.
Better to read that than Polly. She does add some thoughts of her own to spice it up, although it is still of a bit bleak outlook.
Did shop prices come down as a result of the considerable reduction in diesel costs? I must have missed it if they did... :-)
|
If the average wage mentioned in that article is correct at £26k, and Pat says the average working week for a truck driver is 70 or 80 hours.... that's not a good a good salary is it. Hardly surprising nobody want to do it! It's a responsible job and it should pay a decent hourly wage - and probably should be nearer 40 hours per week too.
How come a tube driver gets a high salary and yet someone driving a heavy vehicle on our busy roads gets so much less? And a tube driver doesn't need to unload the passengers either ;-)
|
>> that's not a good a good salary is it.
>>
>> How come a tube driver gets a high salary and yet someone driving a heavy
>> vehicle on our busy roads gets so much less? And a tube driver doesn't need
>> to unload the passengers either ;-)
>>
Part of the hours problem is the nature of the job with waiting around at delivery points a problem.
Pat are drivers really only paid when the Tacho is running?
Overnight stops are also realistically a necessary part of the job for many
Pat, can you say a little about the real situation given that all that most of us see is the Eddie Stobart programmes on the telly.
As for the tube drivers, a militant union keeps their money and conditions very good.
Pendulum a little too much in their favour? Who can say?
|
I will try commerdriver.
Our firm ( I worked for them for 15 years and still train for them now, and Ian has worked there for almost 10 years so I say 'our' in that context) is not one of the top firms but a lot better than some around the Fen.
We're paid from tacho in to tacho out, with no breaks stopped at all during the day so get paid breaks. It's forbidden to do anything 'off tacho' in the yard (as per DVSA now!) so it means some days can be 3 x 15 hours and the rest are nearly always 13 hours.
We're paid hourly but overtime only kicks in at the weekend and bank holiday, but most other firms stop paying you when you have a statutory break so we can't complain.
The average wage is around 32000K to 36000k but if you divide that to the hours worked it would dishearten you completely!
If you love the job the secret is to look at the bottom line on your wage slip and remember you did it all with a smile on your face:)
Nights out are paid at £23 per night and any 'day men' which Ian is can voluntarily offer to have a 9 hour break and go home and they will pay a night out for it, which is a huge concession and much appreciated on both sides when we're busy which we always are.
There is a lot of flexibility and give and take on both sides.
Earlies are given to drivers who prefer them, as are lates, and the option is there to work weekends but no-one has to and we have agency drivers to cover those and bank holidays.
Unlike when I first started, no-one is ever allowed to do anything illegal or take a vehicle out of the yard with a fault, and doing so will invoke a disciplinary.
The job has changed so much in 30 years but I'm a firm believer it has changed for the better.
Anything else, just ask!
Pat
Last edited by: Pat on Wed 3 Aug 16 at 16:25
|
Thanks Pat, nice to get one version of reality.
I have always had a passing interest in Road Haulage, having had a job interview straight out of university with Pickfords 39 years ago, was a management trainee job but their policy at that time was that even management trainees would be put through a class 1 HGV, which appealed at the time.
I ended up in IT instead but you always wonder what might have been.
|
Pickfords are a very good company to work for and a driver for them would be on more than we are, but they would have more physical work to do and probably shorter hours.
Pat
|
Just an afterthought, perhaps I should dd that there are very few unions in Haulage firms these days.
Drivers lost faith in them totally when they started concentrating on paying our speeding fines in return for our subs instead of fighting for better wages and conditions.
Despite the fact that lorry drivers are seen as being bad, we all felt they were encouraging us to speed instead of addressing the issue with management as to why we had to.
We all took a 1.5% pay cut some years ago in the recession to prevent any of us having to be made redundant and it worked. We've now got that back and more besides but a union would never have approved that deal.
I'm not sure if Stobarts have the Union in but we used to have Drivers Reps to mediate and have now found there isn't even the need for that.
Pat
|
Looks like most jobs then, finding the right employer is the key.
|
In ten (surely not as many as twenty?) years' time we won't need lorry drivers. Or car drivers. Everything will be self-driving.
Then where will they all be?
|
>>In ten (surely not as many as twenty?) years' time we won't need lorry drivers. Or car drivers. Everything will be self-driving.
I think that they will be self driving on motorways only. Get to side roads, depots etc. and the technology will be too difficult to implement for a few more years.
I visit hauliers as part of my job and they certainly don't have an easy time of it.
Customers want the world for example tracking and integration to their order and delivery systems. Whilst the larger firms can do this, it is a real expense for smaller firms especially as not all systems are compatible so different interfaces need to be written.
There are late fees if a truck doesn't make the scheduled delivery slot and fees for lost delivery notes also.
I think the late fees should be abolished as they could encourage a driver to speed to get to a depot on time.
Then there are arguments about agreed rates and fuel surcharges that were set out in the contract but the order processing clerk at the customer didn't put them on system so the hauliers invoice gets rejected because the values don't match up and this hits cash flow.
I was with an owner a while back and a customer called and asked for a liveried truck (a truck with the customer's logo on the side) - they use the services of the haulier for deliveries all over the country but not exclusively and not enough work to set aside tractors and trailer just for them. I thought the owner was extremely polite when he explained that unless they paid for the full time use of the vehicle then the chances of getting it liveried would be very slim!
|
The voice of reality zippy!
We were recently charged £350 by a major supermarket for a duplicate set of POD's (proof of delivery) because someone had 'mislaid them.
Pat
|
Zippy, you're living in the past. The technology is there today.
www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/
|
>>Zippy, you're living in the past. The technology is there today.
And you, Mapmaker, have been mislead by adverts. :-)
The Google cars can only work on very carefully mapped roads. Bring one over here and set it on an unmarked county lane and it will struggle.
|
|
What makes you think there ARE any roads, lanes or anything else that isn't actually private property in the UK not already mapped by Google, zippy? I thought the map was long since complete.
|
>> I thought the map was long since complete.
It is not the same map as Google maps!
"...the system works with a very high definition inch-precision map of the area the vehicle is expected to use, including how high the traffic lights are; in addition to on-board systems, some computation is performed on remote computer farms...."
|
>> What makes you think there ARE any roads, lanes or anything else that isn't actually
>> private property in the UK not already mapped by Google, zippy? I thought the map
>> was long since complete.
>>
And google maps, satnav, mapping systems of any kind are always up to date and correct?
While the technology is advanced it is, and will be for a lot longer than 20 years into the future, limited on the roads on which it can be applied, the areas on which it can be applied and the situations in which it can be applied.
Driverless vehicles in cities / remote countryside / offroad loading and maneuvering are a long way off and most of the posters on here will probably not see them in our lifetimes.
If you consider both sharing roads betwen driverless and self drive vehicles, reliability of computers and apps behind the technology, and the liability issues for when it goes wrong it gets even further away.
|
The technology is there Mapmaker but the ability to negotiate directly to delivery points isn't.
The 'driverless' lorries also need a driver to be present to supervise.
.....and they think the driver can be having a legal break while he's doing this despite the definition of a lorry driver's break is ' to be used exclusively for rest and recuperation'.
We're not worried yet:)
Pat
|
>>The 'driverless' lorries also need a driver to be present to supervise.
No they don't. They need a *somebody* to be present.
>>and they think the driver can be having a legal break while he's doing this
On your definition of "driver" - i.e. navvy unloading vehicle - the unloading is the only part where he would be working. Therefore the legal break can happen whilst the driving is taking place, and the untrained navvy need only work - and be paid - whilst the vehicle is not driving.
|
No Mapmaker, you are absolutely wrong on that one.
As I mentioned in another thread, compliance is my profession now and I suggest you Google the legal definition of a lorry drivers break.
Legally he has to free to use it for rest and recuperation, that means go to the toilet, get something to eat and relax.
>>and the untrained navvy need only work - and be paid - whilst the vehicle is not driving.<<
Why do you constantly feel the need to patronise?
The 'untrained navvy' as I was for many years, could rope and sheet anything on a trailer and it wouldn't move an inch or get wet. That is an art, much valued and I bet you couldn't do it.
The loads you see on trailers now behind curtains still have to be restrained, but you wouldn't have a clue how to do that either, would you?
I have plenty of training sessions I could fit you in, how about it?
You would certainly learn a lot.
Pat
|
|
Untrained navvy indeed! There is more to loading and unloading, securing the load etc than some think. I drove for a while (post Uni) as well as working, as required, as a machinist in the engineering factory. The lashing of loads (steel fabrications etc) was the hardest part!
Last edited by: NortonES2 on Thu 4 Aug 16 at 20:14
|
>> On your definition of "driver" - i.e. navvy unloading vehicle - the unloading is the
>> only part where he would be working. Therefore the legal break can happen whilst the
>> driving is taking place, and the untrained navvy need only work - and be paid
>> - whilst the vehicle is not driving.
>>
Not according to the latest ruling from the ECJ (I know this may change on Brexit but it is not a bad ruling for the employee and as I am in a similar position - I agree with it).
www.personneltoday.com/hr/mobile-workers-journeys-work-count-working-time-ecj-ruling/
|
I agree with it too Zippy. It doesn't apply to a lorry driver travelling from home to work and back, which is fair enough but we used to get parked up after 15 hours and then the firms would ring and say someone is on their way down the M11 to you at Birchanger and will be there in a couple of hours. You drive the car/van back to the yard and then go home because we need to use your lorry tonight.
Not anymore, thank goodness.
.....and they wondered why lorry drivers fell asleep while driving?
Pat
|
I am with Pat on this.
I have a few hauliers on my books and visit them regularly. The more profitable ones (and profit is very difficult in the current climate) are the ones that care for their employees and abide by the law and rules to the fullest extent. They do not want fines, bad reputations, accidents etc.
I wouldn't trust 40 tonnes of metal on the road to a computer just yet after seeing what cockups there can be in a £40m IT project.
I think assistance for drivers would be a good thing, like automatic braking, blind spot sensors etc. and progress towards more automation but a huge lorry rumbling down a high street on autopilot - no thanks - not for a decade or two anyway!
|
>> no thanks - not for a decade or two anyway!
Which brings us back to Mapmaker's original post, where he said
"In ten (surely not as many as twenty?) years' time we won't need lorry drivers."
Thanks for the pointer to Google mapping - it seems more likely to me that the "work it out as you go along" approach, (Tesla type) is ultimately going to win this one over the "map everything to the millimetre" approach (Google type) anyway.
|
|
I think the two systems need to work together. A detailed map in the first place and then a suite of sensors looking for differences as the sensors could be fooled. See recent Tesla crashes.
|
The Tesla system currently can't be relied upon to spot a truck/trailer!
Although that could be related to the software responsible for ignoring bridges and it might have thought the trailer the car hit was maybe a bridge.
|
|
We're talking about ten to twenty years ahead, aren't we Rob? Otherwise you might as well complain that a Motorola StarTAC couldn't access the internet in 1996 so there was no point in Motorola getting out of bed in 1997.
|
|
And you still can't get a mobile phone or wireless internet in bits of London never mind in the Yorkshire dales.
|
We are indeed. But my point was a very simple requirement for auto braking using radar would be to stop the car. For some reason the Tesla car that crashed couldn't 'see' a trailer in front of it. I wonder what say a Volvo or VW would have done. I suspect they'd have stopped.
Tesla is trying to be too clever too soon on their cars already on the road. Elon Musk mentioned the bridge thing recently in reference to this accident. The car might have seen the truck and decided to ignore it because you could go under it.
Actually that accident would have played out different in the UK... The trailer would have had to have had side bars to prevent a car from going under it.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 4 Aug 16 at 16:48
|
...I wonder what an autonomous truck would do if it spotted one of these coming......
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-36961433
...duck?....
|
What would any of us make of that.... suddenly something from behind/above you. It would certainly startle many a driver.
A current Tesla car would think it was a bridge.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 4 Aug 16 at 16:51
|
Thanks for the pointer to Google mapping - it seems more likely to me that the "work it out as you go along" approach, (Tesla type) is ultimately going to win this one over the "map everything to the millimetre" approach (Google type) anyway.
Surely it more likely to be a combination of the the 2 techniques . Continuous updating of a centrally held database by those vehicles that are using the system. (Ok data rates/volume would be large by todays standards, but look what we do today cf the year 2000). The upload updating does not have to be in real time anyway. No Google style camera cars will be needed once a critical number of users is reached.
|
>> Surely it more likely to be a combination of the the 2 techniques . Continuous
>> updating of a centrally held database by those vehicles that are using the system. (Ok
>> data rates/volume would be large by todays standards, but look what we do today cf
>> the year 2000). The upload updating does not have to be in real time anyway.
>>
The technical issues are massive in terms of upload, download, reliability and testing.
But the implementation and liability issues will stop it from general use for many years.
Can we ban non driverless vehicles? Can we ban pedestrians or cyclists from using the same roads? How often will the vehicles need to be tested to ensure the kit is all still working and who will test it? What if a sensor / camera etc gets covered in snow / ice or mud?
The media reaction the first time a child is hit by a driverless lorry or car can hardly be imagined and the courts will have a field day with the liability cases.
You may get the idea I am somewhat cynical about the "universal" applicability of driverless vehicles. I have watched the development of computers & data handling at first hand for the last 40 years and even if technology improves at the same rate for the next 40 we are still a long way from general use.
|
|
To my mind the only place driverless vehicles work is on rails. Specifically, the Docklands Light Railway.
|
|
And they managed to implement that in the 80s.
|
|
Look at the other way. Should we allow vehicles with human drivers given the horrendous accident, injury and death rates.
|
|
...to date, it's been a better option than allowing them without human drivers....
|
|
If automated cars prove to have an accident rate of 10% of those driven by humans do you think non automated cars should be banned?
|
|
Given you can 'prove' just about anything you like with statistics, I'd be very suspicious of such a claim. Plus, I can't see a driverless car taking any notice of a policemen!
|
Juat imagine that sometime in the future there is absolutely uncontrevertible proof that driverless cars are that much safer.
Logic would then seem to demand that human driving should be banned.
Just interested in whether most would accept that decision.
|
Juat imagine that sometime in the future there is absolutely uncontrevertible proof that driverless cars are that much safer.
Be a long time coming...
|
>Be a long time coming...
We've had driverless cars in Basingstoke for years.
|
Why the continuing reluctance to answer the question?
I am simply trying to establish whether the resistance to driverless cars is really one of them being unsafe and if there are other reasons what are they?
|
Can't see why it won't happen Norwich.
Robots can do some surgey procedures so driverless cars with the right infrastructure is nothing special.
|
|
There was that Tesla that hit a truck killing its driver in the USA recently. It's sensors failed to pick up a white truck against a white cloud background, or some such. Work is still needed to make them safe...
|
>> There was that Tesla that hit a truck killing its driver in the USA recently.
>> It's sensors failed to pick up a white truck against a white cloud background, or
>> some such. Work is still needed to make them safe...
>>
I think it was the first fatality whilst the system was in use. I wonder how it compares to the population in relation to miles per fatality?
|
The issue with that Tesla isn't that it didn't see the trailer (it did) but it chose to ignore it (thought it was probably a distant low bridge).
If it had side bars (Mansfield bars as they are known in the US) maybe the Tesla would have worked it out as a danger?
Last edited by: rtj70 on Fri 5 Aug 16 at 22:54
|
>> The issue with that Tesla isn't that it didn't see the trailer (it did) but
>> it chose to ignore it (thought it was probably a distant low bridge).
>>
>> If it had side bars (Mansfield bars as they are known in the US) maybe
>> the Tesla would have worked it out as a danger?
>>
It was a combination of the truck being white, the sun reflecting off it and the angle of the sun. I don't know if the bars would have made any difference.
My point is if it has an accident rate lower than human drivers then surely that's a good thing.
|
Driverless taxis are likely to be full of puke/litter or smelly. Having your own driverless car may be expensive and wasteful.
Maybe regular driverless mini buses running on a hub and spoke system, like parcel delivery, would be the most efficient (i.e. cheapest) solution for door to door transport. But not quick unless your origin and destination are on the same spoke.
People like cars. They have their own surroundings, no contact with the smelly public, and their own stuff at hand. So yes, people would reject driverless alternatives especially if they had to share space. Who worries about the accident risk?
|
>>Driverless taxis are likely to be full of puke/litter or smelly.
I doubt it. Shared motor vehicles - Zipcar and the like - are not. To catch a driverless taxi the system will know who you are, and you will pay for the puke (or worse...).
|
>> >>Driverless taxis are likely to be full of puke/litter or smelly.
>>
>> I doubt it. Shared motor vehicles - Zipcar and the like - are not.
Fair point. Daughter uses them occasionally, no problems I know of. But she is never drunk while using them;)
|
Not sure why driverless cars couldn't be privately owned? Hugely attractive for many including the elderly, those who don't currently drive and those who simply don't enjoy drivingi.
In the long run I suspect that computers will prove far safer than humans and when that becomes the case there will be a call for a ban on humans driving vehicles on the road which is not going to be popular with a lot of people who enjoy driving.
All a bit in the future although perhaps not so far away as some imagine.
|
Something that will come sooner rather than later will be inter-car communication. For example, the car in front starts braking and you car knows and does the same.
e.g. www.autoblog.com/2016/07/13/jaguar-autonomous-vehicle-technology/
|
>> Something that will come sooner rather than later will be inter-car communication. For example, the
>> car in front starts braking and you car knows and does the same.
>>
Already there Volkswagen Volvo and probably others have that already
It is the thinking and decision making things that make it difficult
That and the implementation of that large a network with mixed traffic including pedestrians and cyclists
Last edited by: commerdriver on Fri 5 Aug 16 at 23:36
|
|
The technology exists but getting it into cars is still to come. And it needs to work across car marques. No point it only working between two BMWs.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Sat 6 Aug 16 at 01:03
|
Pat, assume you are aware of this?
Seems a bit of a shocking way to treat an employee but is it really out of the ordinary in your trade?
www.gofundme.com/paulstanyard?rcid=0084cec45cdf11e69244bc764e05b494
|
|
That's shocking - surely company insurance covers drivers when working. At least kind donations will cover the cost of bringing his body back.
|
Very poor show!
When I first started international travel for my previous employer they provided an emergency contact list and insurance cover for illness and worse.
It came on a laminated card in English and the language of the country being visited and if we had local representation, their emergency contact details as well!
|
>>surely company insurance covers drivers when working<<
It does, but he was on his statutory weekly rest, where by law you are not allowed to work.
Pat
|
|
I'm fairly certain that, on work trips outside the UK, I was covered for medical expenses etc whether I was working at the time or not - I was only there because of my job. Equity says that should be the same for a lorry driver.
|
>> That's shocking - surely company insurance covers drivers when working. At least kind donations will
>> cover the cost of bringing his body back.
>>
I was thinking the same, it's incredibly tight fisted to not bring his body back. Probably an excess to pay or perhaps not covered by insurance. Either way he was there on company business, so they should be paying.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Mon 8 Aug 16 at 06:51
|
Yes, Bobby, I was aware of this last week and would say it's not the norm, but does happen from time to time.
I certainly don't approve but the Go Fund Me page has now raised £21,000 from publicity on every Facebook drivers group page (of which there are so many) and various drivers forums.
I'd prefer to stay out of moralising on this one at the moment as we've only heard one side of the story and bad feeling against the firm has been whipped up into a total frenzy.
There has even been talk of contacting all of their customers and I don't approve of that either.
Whatever statement the firm make now would be misconstrued, so there's lessons to be learned there about fully assessing a situation before making a decision.
Pat
|
Cheers Pat for the info - I am always very wary about any of these "hard luck" stories and I don't mean that to be disrespectful, until I get the whole side of the story.
Especially ones where people are trapped abroad and then, as in many cases, you look further and find out they didn't bother to buy travel insurance but now expect the public to bail them out!
This is obviously different scenario though.
|
Just to add a bit of balance to this, Mathews have now put out an official statement.
>>>
The company was devastated to hear of the death of our employee Paul Stanyard.
The circumstances are Paul was driving to Greece via Italy, a run he had done many times. He was having his weekly break in Ancona Italy. On Sunday 31st July, we sent him emails with details of his ferry, and when he did not respond, we tried to phone him twice on the Sunday but unfortunately did not get a response.
On the Monday morning we tried again to contact him; there was no response.
We also tried on several occasions to contact his partner Pam, but we didn’t get a response.
We then contacted the Italian police to check on him, this was Monday afternoon, the Italian police reported back to us that they went to the parking place, had to break into the truck and
unfortunately found our employee Paul deceased.
We again phoned his partner Pam several times to inform her, but no answer.
The next morning Pam returned our calls and told us she had been informed overnight by the British Consulate, not via a text message as our ex driver Malcolm Harper claimed.
We subsequently received an email from Pam setting out funeral arrangements, apparently Pam had been advised by the British Consulate (who didn’t speak with us) that the company would sort it out.
On Wednesday we made contact with Paul’s son Carl, who was in Mexico at the time, we Confirmed that the company did not provide life insurance for our employees other than accident injury, and Carl confirmed that Paul also had no life insurance cover.
We have offered to fly the family out to Italy. We have also offered £5000 to assist in repatriation.
We understand that the average cost of repatriation is £3,800 and we have not been supplied with any invoices or documentation setting out the cost of repatriating Paul.
We have asked that the family make contact with our Managing Director and provided them with his direct office line. We have not received a reply.
We are a family run business for 45 years and do not walk away from our responsibilities. We understand Paul has passed through natural causes. We have received threats and intimidation from members of the public which we consider unwarranted and tantamount to blackmail.
<<<
It's entirely feasible, although I still don't like the way it was handled.
The media are reporting just one side of this and so many lorry drivers are forgetting that Matthews also employ a lot of lorry drivers who will be out of work if this witch hunt continues.
Pat
|
Thanks for posting that Pat. It shows the other side and they have offered to money to repatriate and to fly them out. What more should they do? Life insurance would be something else entirely. Maybe they handled it badly but were they given much of a chance?
So although they do not cover insurance for death they have offered this money. What more did the family expect? And why have they not been in touch with this company? Are they expecting a lump sum for death in service - that's usually paid out from the pension funds isn't it?
As you say if the reputation of the company is damaged that's a lot of lorry drivers out of work.
|
There's no surprise.
Money-grabbing relatives. The deceased would no doubt be horrified. Anyway, they've got their £20k now, so they're well in profit on the death.
|
|
Since the money collected has apparently been collected under false pretences - are they guilty of a criminal offence? May be they could mitigate this by donating to suitable hgv charity?
|
It wasn't really collected under false pretences.
Don't shoot the messenger here, but the family have published emails from Mathews on Facebook offering the £5000 if they delete any negative comments about them and don't post any more.
I'm only posting this to give you all a balanced view.
I'm....well, I don't know really where I am with this one.
At heart I'm a lorry driver and always will be.
During the last seven years I've developed my own business and have to work with management, it's not been easy making that transition and I try and keep one foot either side of the fence.
I really feel for both sides here.
Matthews for the way someone handled this without any thought of how a deceased family would feel.
For the family, knowing it could have been me or any one of my colleauges over the years and I hate those thoughts pulling me both ways.
What I try and remember was a couple of years ago when one of our lorries was involved in an accident and caught fire close to where I live.
The driver, who I'd known and had been with the firm for many years was killed.
The accident happened around 14.30 and the firm was informed around 17.30.
They kept schtum, as everyone was going home and they needed to go and break the news to his wife. Recover the lorry and try and find out if he was to blame at all....he wasn't.
This took until around 21.00 that evening and they planned to inform all the staff together at 9am the following morning of his death, when office/warehouse and drivers were all in work.
At 08.10 Cambs Police posted his identity on Facebook, would you believe, and I will never forgive them for that, neither will his wife.
My firm (ex employer/customer) were slated for not letting the staff know before it was made public but what else could they have done.
I see the chain of events in the statement from Matthews and can see how things have happened.
They don't deserve the flak they are getting now from the world and it's wife and it could well be the end of a major employer in the Eastern area where jobs are not plentiful.
....having written all that, I still don't know who's side I'm on so will stay strictly neutral.
Pat
|
Maybe there was a hiatus between the conversation on Wednesday when it emerged that there was no life insurance either way and company offering money for flights and repatriation.
In the world of social media a story can be round the globe in less time then it takes a rumour to circulate in the office.
Staff in the field can drop dead at any time. A colleague of mine c1980 suffered an embolism and died on a train to Bristol. He was around 25.
You need a clear process and staff with the skills to put it into effect rapidly. In this case a bit of BS about Official Secrets ensured his personal baggage was returned to the office and the porn stash removed before it was returned to his family. He was a Greek Cypriot and the Orthodox funeral with the deceased on display and loudly grieving relatives was hard for those that attended to take.
|
The way this has been reported as the company bringing home the lorry and "leaving behind" the deceased driver, as if they could have strapped him into the passenger seat or bundled him into the trailer was just silly. The relevant authorities would have had to follow their own procedures for a sudden death and released the body to an accredited party with the required paperwork. He wasn't going anywhere, or coming to any further harm - it was entirely reasonable for the firm to deal with the load/lorry.
My father died while on holiday in Scotland. My brother and I brought back his car, and my mother, and we also 'left him behind'. We didn't have a choice. His body remained in control of the authorities until they were satisfied as to the circumstances and cause of death, after which it was brought back by a local undertaker.
|
I don't like the way the offer of £5000 was conditional on removing negative comments. Well the horse had bolted. And them posting the emails meant the family rejected this.
I can't see why the company was being criticised for bringing back the lorry and not he body either. They're not undertakers so could bring him back even if they wished they could.
With social media it is all to fast for some news to get out there. Like Pat's example above.
I'm not fan of social media like Facebook, Twitter etc. Not because of people posting innocent things per se. It's the linking of info by these companies. For example, the Facebook activity of working out who you might know - by comparing everyone's address books to see who you know. A massive compute job but they do it all the time.
|
Vision of industrial failure; the UK lorry trade - Pat
