9.1
Heavy vehicles are disproportionately involved in crash deaths and serious injuries on Australian roads. The Bureau of Infrastructure and Transport Research Economics (BITRE) reports that in 2016, heavy vehicles made up 2.4 per cent of registrations and 7 per cent of kilometres travelled but were involved in 16 per cent of road crash fatalities and 4 per cent of injuries.
9.2
Stakeholders noted that with the establishment of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) and enhancement to vehicle standards and regulatory requirements, there has been a gradual decline in fatal and serious injury crashes involving articulated heavy vehicles. By contrast, there have been gradual increases in fatal and serious injury crashes involving rigid vehicles and buses. This is reflected in Figure 9.1 below.
9.3
Heavy vehicle drivers also have higher rates of exposure to workplace road trauma due to the nature of their work. In this regard, the Australian Road Research Board (ARRB) stated:
[A] driver’s workplace is mobile, requiring interaction with public spaces shared by…motorists, pedestrians, and other commercial operators. [If] a crash occurs, the public tends to be affected, either through direct involvement in the accident or via impacts on infrastructure and other costs to the community. Because of this the transport industry has a higher burden than …other industries in managing workplace-related road trauma.
9.4
Notwithstanding overrepresentation of heavy vehicles in fatal and serious injury crashes, evidence suggests that heavy vehicles are less likely to be at fault when a crash occurs. NVHR drew attention to a report by National Transport Insurance (NTI) and the National Truck Accident Research Centre (NTARC), which found that in 2020 in almost 80 per cent of fatal crashes involving a truck and a car, the car was the at-fault party.
9.5
Heavy vehicle safety is a priority area in the NRSS 2021–30, with a range of actions proposed to increase safety. This is reflected in the extract below.
9.6
In 2018, infrastructure and transport ministers initiated a review of the Heavy Vehicle National Law (HVNL) with the aim of delivering a more modern, outcomes focused framework that will improve safety for all road users. In May 2021, ministers agreed to a forward program work resulting from the review. The program has six reform areas: operator assurance; technology and data; duties and driver health; fatigue management; vehicles and access; and legislative approach. It was proposed that the National Transport Commission (NTC) would deliver more detailed advice to ministers over the 12 months from May 2021, with final legislation to be presented to ministers in mid-2023.
9.7
Stakeholders highlighted several areas in which safety for the heavy vehicle sector could be improved, noting in some cases that these have been raised before other inquiry processes. Proposed measures were closely linked to other areas of road safety—consistent with the Safe System approach. This chapter covers the following matters:
Vehicle age and safety features.
Formal safety management.
Heavy vehicle rest areas.
Training and licensing arrangements.
Commercial incentives towards unsafe behaviour.
Driver physical and mental health.
Suicide in the road transport system.
9.8
The chapter concludes with the committee’s views and recommendations.
9.9
In August 2021, the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport (RRAT) Committee tabled its report: Without Trucks, Australia Stops: the development of a viable, safe, sustainable, and efficient road transport industry (RRAT Trucking Report). This report considered in detail various issues contributing to as a ‘safety crisis’ in the heavy vehicle sector. Some of these issues are canvassed in this chapter.
Heavy vehicle safety features
9.10
Several stakeholders indicated that improving the safety of heavy vehicles themselves is critical to enhancing safety outcomes in the sector, calling for measures to increase fitment of safety features which help to avoid crashes and protect both occupants and other road users.
9.11
ARRB observed that heavy vehicles frequently lack safety features that are common in light vehicles, including airbags and seatbelt pretensioners. ARRB stated that there is ‘no doubt’ that such features (as well as more advanced features such as automatic driver assistance) will reduce heavy vehicle crashes and ensure drivers are able to avoid serious and fatal injury.
9.12
The Toll Group asserted that new technology and advancements in vehicle design may substantially enhance road safety outcomes, citing mandatory seat belts as an example of a policy which has encouraged the uptake of such features. The Toll Group also called for greater uptake of technologies such as Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB), lane keep assist, stability control and fatigue warning across the sector.
9.13
The Electric Vehicle Council (EVC) raised concern that safety technologies including adaptive cruise control, collision warnings, AEB, lane departure warnings, and stability control, are not yet mandatory in Australian heavy vehicles as the industry is operating on the Euro V standard. According to EVC, shifting to the Euro VI standard would demonstrate a desire for newer, safer vehicles and enable accelerated uptake of electric heavy vehicles.
9.14
NHVR expressed strong support for measures to encourage fitment of safety technologies, noting that it has an ongoing program of work (Vehicle Safety and Environmental Technology Uptake Plan (SETUP)) for exactly this purpose. NHVR also cautioned that there may be challenges associated with adopting new technologies—particularly around vehicle mass and how this is regulated. NHVR stated:
[A] Euro 6 vehicle …is a heavier vehicle, so it has some front-axle-mass issues which jurisdictions need to grapple with. If we don't, we're going to lose these safety benefits, because you're going to have an operator trying to buy a safer truck that is non-compliant with current front-axle-mass provisions …We also know that …electric vehicles are going to be heavier on front-axle mass.
9.15
Relevant to the present inquiry, the SETUP program contains five priority initiatives to increase fitment of safety technology across the sector and to optimise its use:
Advocate for increased harmonisation of Australian vehicle standards to allow for the latest designs from origin markets and fitment of safety and environmental technology from those major market designs.
Relax access and use limits for vehicles fitted with the latest environmental and vehicle safety technology.
Ensure in-service requirements maximise the benefits of technology.
Empower industry to make informed purchasing decisions.
Educate industry about vehicle safety and environmental technology.
9.16
A common theme expressed in evidence was the need to encourage if not mandate autonomous and semi-autonomous features including AEB, lane keep assist, electronic stability control, and adaptive cruise control.
9.17
The Australian Trucking Association (ATA) told the committee that it supports implementation of AEB for new and new model rigid trucks as soon as is feasibly possible. However, it also cautioned that there are still issues to address in relation to AEB on heavy vehicles such as semitrailers:
[Different manufacturers have taken different approaches to how AEB reacts when it's towing what we call 'dumb' trailers [trailers which don't have electronics in the braking system] We are working with the engineers in the infrastructure department to sort out an approach to AEB for Australia's unique heavy vehicle[s].
9.18
The Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (CILTA)also supported mandatory fitment of AEB for new heavy vehicles, noting that this is already occurring in Western Australia (WA). According to CILTA, the mandatory fitment of AEB should be accompanied by driver education to encourage best-practice use of the technology and maximise safety outcomes.
9.19
The Amy Gillet Foundation (AGF) said that available technologies such as AEB and fatigue monitoring systems must be integrated into the heavy vehicle fleet as a matter of urgency to protect vulnerable road users and to align Australia with international best practice. AGF also emphasised that measures to encourage uptake of technologies must ensure safety for vulnerable road users is considered, noting that some technologies (such as lane keep assist) have the potential to worsen safety outcomes for cyclists. It highlighted the United Kingdom (UK) ‘Safer Lorry Scheme’ as an ‘excellent starting point’.
9.20
Professor Raphael Grzebieta noted that while rollover continues to be a significant causal factor in heavy vehicle crashes, it is not yet mandatory that heavy vehicles be fitted with braking systems with stability control, nor is there a requirement that cabins be constructed to a particular strength to minimise risks of fatal or serious injury. Accordingly, Professor Grzebieta recommended that the federal government introduce Australian Design Rules (ADRs) to:
Require retrofitting of electronic braking systems with stability control on existing trailers and fitment of these technologies to all new trailers.
Mandate that certain smaller vehicles comply with United States (US) roof crush and ejection mitigation standards.
9.21
The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications (DITRDC) told the committee that the Commonwealth is ‘well advanced’ in terms of mandating AEB for the heavy vehicle sector. DITRDC advised that introduction of AEB has however been delayed due to concerns about compatibility between trucks fitted with AEB and heavy trailers, stating:
[Industry has] raised a concern about the connection between a smart truck, which has [the AEB] technology, and… a 'dumb trailer', which does not…if you combine those two, and the truck engages, the trailer may not be able to follow in a way that's safe. We're working through a solution, potentially an off switch, with the Australian Trucking Association and the Truck Industry Council, and we're hopeful of resolving that shortly. Once that's resolved, we'll be able to put the new ADR to the minister for approval.
Heavy vehicle conspicuity markings
9.22
In addition to calling for fitment of safety technologies, some stakeholders called for measures to increase visibility for heavy vehicles via conspicuity markings, noting that these have the potential to substantially reduce crashes at night and in adverse weather conditions.
9.23
3M told the committee that while vehicle conspicuity markings are part of ADR 13/00, the ADR provides that markings are voluntary. 3M asserted that choosing not to mandate such markings has resulted in Australia ‘missing out’ on a 58 per cent reduction in night-time crashes that other countries have enjoyed since mandating conspicuity markings 30 years ago.
9.24
3M told the committee that conspicuity markings should be mandated in Australia for all heavy vehicles and for new vehicles as soon as possible, to improve safety outcomes and align Australia’s road safety approach with global best practice. 3M added that while proposals to mandate conspicuity markings are broadly supported across the heavy vehicle sector, just two to three per cent of vehicles are currently equipped with this feature.
9.25
The NHVR similarly supported the use of conspicuity tape and other markings as a means of increasing visibility, adding that work will be needed to fully understand the cost implications of requiring fitment to all vehicles. The NHVR also noted that operators have the option of fitting either rear marking plates (which identify a vehicle being over 12 tonnes or a trailer as being over 10 tonnes) or conspicuity markings.
Vehicle age
9.26
Vehicle age was also a concern for the heavy vehicle sector. Stakeholders supported lowering the age of the heavy vehicle fleet and mechanisms to encourage purchase of newer, safer vehicles.
9.27
The Centre for Automotive Safety Research (CASR), University of Adelaide, outlined the business case for the purchase of newer vehicles, noting that insurance savings associated with newer vehicles should offset additional purchase costs.
9.28
The Toll Group observed that Australia’s heavy vehicle fleet is older by international standards, highlighting the ‘known relationship’ between age and safety. According to the Toll Group, there are currently disincentives to the purchase of newer vehicles—including legal limits on axle loads and vehicle dimensions. The Toll Group stated that these should be addressed via policy and legislative reforms.
9.29
The ARRB told the committee that disposal of older vehicles from the heavy fleet should be encouraged. It noted that the average age of Australian heavy vehicles as reported by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) is approximately 14 years. This was a concern for ARRB, as the NHVR has found that vehicles older than 13 years are associated with significantly higher rates of noncompliance with the HVNL.
High Productivity Vehicles
9.30
Some inquiry participants supported measures to increase the rollout of High Productivity Vehicles (HPVs)—also known as Performance Based Standard (PBS) vehicles—across the sector, noting that these vehicles demonstrate better safety, environmental and productivity outcomes than ‘conventional’ heavy vehicles.
9.31
The Toll Group observed that HPVs continue to be underrepresented on the road network due to perceptions of HPVs as ‘monster trucks’ which are intimidating, difficult to overtake, and compromising of local amenity. Despite this, the Toll Group supported use of HPVs on a greater number of roads due to demonstrated productivity benefits that drive down freight costs and environmental impacts. The Toll Group also endorsed public education campaigns on the benefits of HPVs.
9.32
CILTA called for greater rollout of HPVs, noting that this could be achieved via streamlining access approvals. As to take-up of HPVs, CILTA stated:
The big problem has been access…The Heavy Vehicle Regulator, their chief engineer and their folk up there are slowly chipping away at the state transport agencies to take a good look at which vehicles can use which roads safely. And this is one of the reasons why I think the safety results have been so good with PBS vehicles. Even though it's probably slower than the industry would like as far as access goes, I think there has been a certain degree of contemplation, consideration for opening [new] roads.
9.33
NHVR told the committee that it continues to promote uptake of HPVs, including by developing a policy framework for ‘PBS 2.0’, by expanding gazetted road networks (that is, networks on which HPVs are permitted to operate), and through improving design and vehicle approval processes.
Measures to increase uptake of safer vehicles
9.34
Stakeholders suggested several mechanisms to increase the number of newer, safer heavy vehicles on Australian roads. These were in addition to measures to increase the safety of vehicles generally (such as streamlining regulatory processes for ADRs and developing ‘roadmaps’ for mandating proven vehicle safety features), which are discussed elsewhere in the report.
9.35
Financial incentives featured prominently in evidence and proposals put to the committee. ATA noted that temporary full-expensing measures introduced by government as a COVID-19 has ‘increased dramatically’ the level of interest from trucking companies in buying new or recently second-hand equipment and vehicles and has increased uptake of new and recently second-hand vehicles across the sector. ATA encouraged the government to consider extending temporary full-expensing measures to incentivise industry members to upgrade their fleet.
9.36
Abolition of stamp duty on registration of heavy vehicles was also suggested as a means by which newer, safer heavy vehicle could be made more affordable. In this regard, NatRoads described stamp duty as a ‘ridiculous tax…[that] adds three per cent…to the cost of new heavy vehicles’.
9.37
The Toll Group told the committee that with the introduction of the HVNL, certain incentives towards the purchase of newer vehicles (including stamp duty concessions) were abolished. Accordingly, there may be merit in re-introducing concessions for drivers with ‘safe, unblemished records’.
9.38
Further, the Toll Group recommended that governments explore measures such as registration discounts, reduced fuel excise; and preference in government contracts to encourage purchase of safer heavy vehicles. The Toll Group also suggested that Australia consider a ‘hard stop’ on the age of vehicles as occurs in Singapore. The Toll Group explained the Singaporean policy to the committee as follows:
In order to own and operate a vehicle in Singapore, a Certificate of Entitlement (COE) is required. The COE allows the vehicle owner the right to own a vehicle for a period of [ten] years.
While a vehicle owner may apply for another COE at the end of the ten years, they must bid for the COE in a quota system…
The system keeps vehicle age relatively low with 76 [per cent] of goods vehicles aged under 10 years at 31 October 2021. In contrast, 35.8 per cent of Australian heavy rigid trucks and 49 per cent of articulated trucks were manufactured within the last ten years according to Australian Bureau of Statistics data…
Australian conditions are quite different [to Singapore’s]. The sometimes-vast distances between Australian towns and cities mean that vehicle ownership/access to a vehicle is a necessity for many. Toll Group cited the Singaporean experience as emblematic of what can be achieved when government is prepared to pull the policy levers at its disposal.
Commercial incentives towards unsafe behaviour
9.39
Some stakeholders indicated that commercial issues such as performance-based pay, low freight rates, poor working conditions, and unfair contract terms are adversely impacting safety outcomes for the heavy vehicle sector.
9.40
Toll Group, for example, noted that commercial pressures that encourage high-risk behaviour ‘start at the contract’, stating that addressing issues associated with freight rates requires vigorous enforcement of the HVNL, with a focus on customers:
[C]ustomers [must] …grasp that if they make decisions to go with the lowest-cost operator, without asking questions about how that low cost is achieved and what the untoward consequences of that might be, they are committing an offence. For that to have any meaning, [the regulator] …needs to…police along the supply chain and bring credible prosecutions.
9.41
NatRoads also acknowledged the connection between freight rates, pay and conditions for drivers, and safety outcomes, noting that modern award rates should always act as a floor below which no contract should be made. However, NatRoads told the committee, even more significant than award rates is the issue of unfair contract terms:
There are certain contractual [terms] that should not be permitted. We've seen…contracts…[that] enable large customers to terminate a contract on one month's notice. The contractor who takes up the contract may have geared up with delivery, with sunk expenses, and got up to service the contract for five years only to have the [contract terminated]…after a month on notice.
9.42
According to NatRoads, legislation governing unfair contract terms should be strengthened to avoid issues such as those outlined above (for example, by placing limits on powers to terminate a contract). A road transport code could also be developed under competition and consumer legislation, to address matters such as contract length, termination, and payment times.
9.43
Other inquiry participants indicated that it may be a mistake to assume that freight rates are the key to enhancing safety for the heavy vehicle sector.
9.44
CILTA noted that as over half the heavy sector is not engaged on a hire-and-reward basis, changes to rates are unlikely to be sufficient to substantially improve safety outcomes. Expanding on this, CILTA told the committee that little is known about the safety performance of the non-hire-and reward (ancillary) sector and that more research is needed:
[Research by] Safe Work Australia in 2014 [found that] ...50 per cent of driver deaths were in the non-hire-and-reward sector. Because [drivers] do fewer kilometres, [the ancillary sector] may be more dangerous, on a per-kilometre basis, than…the for-hire sector …Quite often, if you mention the hire-and-reward industry, the overall impression is that [truck drivers] are being ‘flogged to death’ on minimum freight rates [while driving on highways].
That's not true. 67 per cent of trucks are regional urban and capital city urban. Only 30 per cent of the trucks in Australia do interstate work, and they're the semis, the B-doubles, the road trains. We do not have a handle on [whether] fatal accidents [are occurring in the hire-and-reward or ancillary sector].
Heavy vehicle data
9.45
Stakeholders identified critical gaps in the data on the heavy vehicle sector. A key issue was that existing data focuses on the ‘hire and reward’ sector, which makes up just 42 per cent of the industry.
9.46
CILTA called for additional data to be collected on incidents involving participants in the ‘ancillary’ sector, noting that this sector often involves older vehicles and vehicles driven for personal use.
9.47
CILTA also indicated that data on fatalities involving a heavy vehicle may fail to distinguish between crashes which are the fault of the truck driver and those that are not. This leads users of data to believe that fatal incidents involving a truck are always the fault of the truck driver, even though the truck driver is not at fault in 80 per cent of cases. CILTA stated that this perception needs to be dispelled by making clear which driver was at fault in published data on fatalities and serious injuries.
9.48
CILTA went on to note that while data is available on heavy vehicle crashes involving fatal or serious injury, there is limited data on crashes that do not. This limits the extent to which risks can be identified and countermeasures developed. Expanding on this, CILTA stated:
For every fatal crash …there are 30 major incidents that may or may not involve a serious injury or a fatal, but they are serious crashes that …warrant a police report. On that basis, the current level of fatal crashes, being 160 involving trucks, is 4,800 major crash incidents in Australia. Very few people have got the data on those.
…[W]hat we 're getting now by just looking at this very small, very emotive and very serious tip of the iceberg, which is just the fatal and serious injuries—accidents that impact on humans, as opposed to truck rollovers, crashing, writing off $800,000 worth of an A-double tanker or something like that.
9.49
NHVR told the committee that it is important to collect data on both the causes of a crash and on relevant heavy vehicles. For example, some crashes are recorded as ‘truck rollover’—providing little insight into the vehicle. According to the NHVR, reporting should include categories such as load and vehicle type (for example, double road train, modular b-triple, livestock), to provide a better view of vehicle performance.
9.50
Measures to improve visibility on the number of operators were also raised in evidence. For example, NHVR noted that increased visibility might be effected through a national registration system for heavy vehicles which separates heavy and light vehicles and recognises operators as professional entities. Such a system would improve oversight of Australia’s heavy vehicle fleet, enhance information sharing between the NHVR and industry, and remove the need for additional systems for operator enrolment. The most ‘practical’ option to improve registration, the NHVR continued, would be to establish a national interface enabling industry to do business in one place, with states and territories continuing to manage back-end transaction functions. Revenues associated with the system would continue to flow through to states and territories.
Improving ‘blameless’ crash investigations
9.51
Some stakeholders called for improvements to crash investigation to enable more reliable data on heavy vehicle crashes, with a focus on determining the cause of a crash rather than apportioning liability.
9.52
ARRB, for example, noted that investigations may neglect factors such as vehicle safety and the quality of road infrastructure. ARRB called for development of a ‘blameless’ crash investigation framework, noting this:
…will deliver a step change in the understanding of [heavy vehicle] road crashes in Australia and the novel solutions that will flow from this understanding will provide the necessary guidance on what must be done to reduce the road toll.
9.53
ATA and NatRoads noted that road crashes are currently investigated by the police and coronial systems. This approach meets legal and insurance needs, but rarely involves collecting data on the causes of a crash. By contrast, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) investigates incidents in the aviation, rail, and marine sectors, with data used to support development of interventions. ATA and NatRoads recommended that ATSB investigations be extended to the heavy vehicle sector.
Formal safety management
9.54
Stakeholders emphasised that the heavy vehicle sector should be a key focus area for improving workplace road safety, given that vehicle use is a core part of operations for most organisations. Stakeholders called for measures to formalise safety arrangements in workplaces.
9.55
NHVR, for example, indicated that parties in the chain of responsibility under the HVNL should implement a formal safety management system (SMS) in their business. NHVR explained that an SMS is ‘a systematic approach to managing safety, including…structures, accountabilities, policies, and procedures, which are integrated throughout the business wherever possible’. Adopting an SMS has helped reduce safety incidents in other transport sectors, NHVR continued, and is one of the most effective ways a business can meet safety obligations under the HVNL.
9.56
NHVR noted that it recently released a nine-step SMS roadmap to guide the industry towards development of an SMS. It told the committee that:
The [roadmap] takes an operator through the various stages of evolution and development in their safety management system. It goes from concept, if they haven't got one in play—so tools, guidance, and information available on our website—to the next phase, which then starts to look at how you enhance and develop those safety management principles and practices; to the final stage of the processes, which looks at how you come back and review.
Heavy vehicle operator accreditation
9.57
Accreditation schemes can offer industry members regulatory concessions in return for demonstrating implementation of systems to achieve specified outcomes. Existing schemes include TruckSafe and the National Heavy Vehicle Accreditation Scheme (NHVAS). Both are voluntary.
NHVAS is administered by NHVR. Operators apply for accreditation in core areas such as mass management, maintenance management, and fatigue management (basic and advanced). Accreditation recognises that an operator has robust safety management systems in place and affords the operator certain concessions and exemptions.
TruckSafe is an industry initiative led by ATA that allows operators to seek accreditation by meeting minimum standards in the following areas: business management; health and wellbeing; fatigue management; vehicle standards management; risk management; speed management; and mass, dimension, and load management. Livestock operators must also meet modules focused on animal welfare.
9.58
On accreditation, stakeholders indicated that while the existing schemes have been effective in improving safety in the sector, there would be merit in exploring a national road freight standard or accreditation to enable contractors to select operators with the highest possible safety performance.
9.59
For example, CILTA observed that adopting international standards for freight (such as those developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)) can lead to accident rates three times lower than for the members of existing schemes. Further, a national scheme could draw from the more effective elements of NHVAS and TruckSafe and help resolve inconsistencies between the existing programs.
9.60
CILTA also drew attention to a proposed ‘five-star trucking’ initiative—a rating system for transport operators in relation to safety and business practices. The system ranks operators from ‘compliance’ to best practice in areas such as speed management, fatigue, driver health, and vehicle and conditions management. Operators with five stars benefit from concessions such as fewer inspections, extended work hours and infrastructure access.
9.61
The Toll Group generally supported accreditation and indicated that there may be merit in embedding this in public procurement practices—such that a government body would not contract with an operator unless they are able to demonstrate a sound safety culture. However, work would be needed to deliver consistency around such a scheme so that procurement decisions compare like for like. Toll also expressed qualified support for the ‘five-star trucking’ concept, noting that implementing the scheme could be difficult:
Australia does not have an operator licensing system. At this point in time not even the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator knows precisely how many transport operators there are in this country. Without a mechanism to identify them all and corral them all into a system where they're providing data, almost inevitably one ends up in a situation where the operators inclined to participate tend to be …more safety focussed …better-performing operators.
9.62
ARRB also indicated support for an accreditation-type program, noting that this could be based on approaches in other jurisdictions:
Effective heavy vehicle safety accreditation schemes exist within the UK based on the Safe System approach to road safety. These are supported by a robust regulatory framework requiring minimum standards for road transport operators. Heavy vehicle fleet[s] across Northern European countries have a much younger average age and are required to comply with a broader suite of mandatory passive and active vehicle safety standards.
Fatigue management
9.63
The HVNL and associated regulations govern management of fatigue in participating jurisdictions. The laws set out permissible driving hours, circumstances in which provisions relating to driving hours will be breached, and how drivers record work and rest times (typically in work diaries). Under the NHVAS, operators can also apply to NHVR for accreditation under Basic Fatigue Management (BFM) and Advanced Fatigue Management (AFM) modules. Accreditation allows drivers to operate under longer and more flexible work hours—provided there are robust systems in place to manage fatigue-related risks.
9.64
In its submission, the observed that significant efforts have been made to enable operators to join the AFM module, emphasising that the module also requires the operator to have in place comprehensive fatigue risk management systems. However, NHVR is also seeking changes to the HVNL—including the introduction of a fatigue risk management system (FRMS) standard focused on classifying and managing risk factors.
9.65
Other stakeholders indicated that the HVNL may not effectively manage fatigue. Professor Raphael Grzebieta noted that permitted heavy vehicle driving hours in Australia are high compared to other countries—especially for long-distance drivers—as outlined in Table 9.1:
Table 9.1: Comparison of permitted working hours: Australia and Europe
|
|
|
|
|
24 hours
|
9 hours
(May be extended to 10 hours for two days in the week)
|
12 hours (standard)
14 hours (Basic Fatigue Management)
15.5 hours (Advanced Fatigue Management)
|
|
7 days
|
56 hours
|
72 hours
84 hours in any seven days over a two-week period (Basic Fatigue Management)
|
|
14 days
|
90 hours
|
144 hours
154 hours (Advanced Fatigue Management)
|
Source: Professor Raphael Grzebieta, Submission 54, p. 17
9.66
Professor Grzebieta recommended that the federal government adopt the driving times and rest periods from the applicable European regulations, also highlighting comments made by Professor Anne Williamson to support this recommendation:
Our long-haul truck drivers are allowed to do longer hours of work…than any other work group in Australia, and far longer than truck drivers in virtually any other country in the world. Currently, long haul truck drivers are allowed to drive for 72 hours in a week. They can do 84 hours in a week if they have done some "fatigue training". Drivers are required to have a break of only seven continuous hours in any 24: certainly not a long enough break for a driver to have meals, shower and obtain sufficient sleep…The regulations also only require drivers to take a long break of 24 hours once in every seven days, and again, this could be a break from 3am to 3am so drivers do not get a good night of sleep. A driver can do this pattern of work and rest for months or years, never actually obtaining sufficient rest or sleep.
Work diaries
9.67
An area of concern for some stakeholders was the use of work diaries to monitor fatigue and enforce compliance.
9.68
Mr Andrew Coulton told the committee that work diaries are ‘a waste of time’ and ‘a constant struggle’ for drivers and operators, noting that:
Truck drivers are often not highly educated and can struggle with the high volume of quite complex instructions in work diaries.
Diaries are often so complicated that NHVR officers often contradict each other in their interpretation of the rules.
Strict adherence to diaries can add to drivers’ stress and fatigue.
Noncompliance is strictly policed, with penalties exceeding the severity of a breach. For example, there have been instances of drivers losing up to half a week’s wages for an unintentional failure to sign a page or to correctly calculate work hours.
9.69
Mr Coulton opined that work diaries ultimately ‘manage compliance, not fatigue’ and are not aligned with the realities of the freight task. Moreover, strict compliance with diaries can lead to high-risk behaviour on the road:
Fatigue is stop and rest as required, ensure you drive during the day where possible, so you don’t drive while impaired by your circadian rhythm. The NHVR seem hell bent on harassing drivers for leaving a few minutes early from a break or stopping a couple of minutes late. If you were managing fatigue then you wouldn’t want a driver sitting in his truck, engine running waiting for 2 or 3 minutes for the exact time to leave…
It [also] sometimes happens that you realise you only have just enough time to reach your destination so you drive like someone possessed adding risk to other road users and yourself not to mention the additional fuel used…so you are not stuck in an unsafe place 15 minutes from home for a 24 hour break….Fatigue management and road safety should not be about [pedantry] and …compliance, [it] should be about real fatigue and safety.
9.70
ARRB similarly asserted that work diaries do not align with the true complexities of fatigue, and do not permit the development of advanced mitigation strategies. Accordingly, ARRB called for the implementation of advanced fatigue monitoring systems—including telematics and location monitoring apps—to ensure fatigue is being appropriately addressed.
9.71
Australia Post (AusPost) indicated that electronic work diaries (EWDs) may ensure work and rest hours comply with the HVNL and that fatigue is properly managed. AusPost noted that a 10-week trial of EWDs proved that EWDs are quicker to fill out than paper-based diaries, reduce risks of records being damaged or lost, and reduce error associated with manual calculations. Prompts to take breaks are also ‘extremely advantageous’.
9.72
The NHVR told the committee that the HVNL must recognise the use of technology in delivering improved safety outcomes, stating that this will require regulators, technology partners and industry working together to increase uptake of EWDs and distraction detection technologies.
Fatigue monitoring systems
9.73
Some stakeholders called for greater use of fatigue monitoring systems as a means of managing fatigue-related risk, noting that identifying the signs of fatigue and taking appropriate steps may be more effective as a risk management strategy than strict enforcement of driving hours and breaks.
9.74
For example, the National Rural Health Alliance (NRHA) called for the rollout of technology-assisted monitoring of warning signs, noting that fatigue is a frequent cause of fatal injury crashes involving heavy vehicles.
9.75
ARRB highlighted to the committee that VicRoads and Monash University are seeking to develop a camera test that scans the pupils to detect signs of tiredness and reduce fatigue-related crashes. ARRB stated that if the trial is successful police would be able to stop people who appear to be driving erratically and test for fatigue—similar to existing drug and alcohol testing. ARRB acknowledged that it may be hard to establish objective criteria to identify fatigue, as fatigue varies between individuals in how it manifests and how it affects driving ability.
Rest areas
9.76
Several inquiry participants noted that sufficient numbers of appropriately- designed rest areas are critical to improving safety in the heavy vehicle sector, and in particular to reducing fatal and serious injuries associated with fatigue. Stakeholders raised concern that there are insufficient rest areas on major transit routes, and many rest areas are poorly maintained.
9.77
Roads Australia (RA) called for an increased number of rest areas for light and heavy vehicle drivers:
[T]here aren't enough rest areas, they aren't built well enough, and they are not suitable for drivers. Roads Australia is a member of Healthy Heads in Trucks and Sheds, and one aspect that keeps on coming up in that conversation is about rest areas, particularly because drivers do need a good, solid rest area away from the noise of others and allows them to truly rest.
9.78
NHVR noted that many rest areas are poorly designed, lack shade and shelter, and lack female bathroom facilities. This creates challenges for both the supply and diversity of drivers in the sector, which is of particular concern as drivers are retiring while demand services grows.
9.79
Similarly, the Toll Group noted that key barriers to entry into the heavy vehicle sector for women include personal security and access to clean toilets, adding that there is limited research on how the trucking industry can encourage more female entrants.
9.80
The Western Roads Federation (WRF) also expressed concerns about the state of rest areas—particularly in rural and remote areas—stating that:
Once you get…about 2½ hours north of Perth…the rest areas tend to be just a dirt inlay which is slightly off the road. The toilet facilities are the nearby scrub. When you have several tourists, as we've had recently, they don't like to step too far off the gravel part into the scrub, so you have a line of unsanitary stuff all around the rest area. And that's the industry that we want to attract females to. There are no toilets…You're 1,200 kilometres out of Perth before you hit a public toilet and it's not particularly pleasant to go into anyway. We've got to find more rest areas.
9.81
Natroads told the committee that the Austroads Guidelines for the Provision of Heavy Vehicle Rest Area Facilities should be implemented by jurisdictions as design guidelines for heavy vehicle rest areas.
9.82
Some inquiry participants representing state and territory Governments indicated that jurisdictions are working to establish and upgrade rest areas, particularly on major highways. For example, the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads (DTMR), stated that:
Since 2013, 27 new rest areas have been established on the Bruce Highway, along with the upgrade of seven existing sites. By 2027, the next round of road infrastructure funding, TMR is anticipating the establishment of 10 new rest areas on the Bruce Highway along with upgrades to 29 existing sites. Also in 2021, in line with actions under Queensland’s Road Safety Action Plan, [we] are undertaking an audit of over 1,000 TMR rest areas. The audit will have a specific focus on disability access features.
9.83
Additionally, DTMR noted that Queensland has adopted standards requiring stopping bays every 30 km and rest areas every 80km. This is a requirement on all state roads for all vehicles.
Funding for new and upgraded rest areas
9.84
Stakeholders indicated that additional (and better targeted) funding will be necessary to ensure adequate numbers of rest facilities for all road users.
9.85
RA observed that while government has access to information on the most appropriate places to build rest areas (for example, telematics data on the frequency and location of stops), efforts to build additional rest areas can be stymied by the cost of greenfield development and a lack of investment in capacity-building.
9.86
ATA and NatRoads raised concerns that Commonwealth infrastructure funding does not expressly require road projects to include appropriate rest areas and recommended that funding projects apply Austroads rest area guidance to the planning, design, and delivery of infrastructure. NatRoads also proposed that tenders for the construction of road infrastructure be required to include plans for the construction of rest areas.
9.87
ARRB, citing its own research, told the committee that the allocation of funding should involve a cost-benefit analysis of installing a rest area—taking account of the needs of the road users:
I think what's been identified [as] critical when we're talking about implementation of …rest areas is a good understanding of cost—how much what I will call platinum-, gold-, silver- and bronze-level rest areas have cost to install in the past over the last 10 years, let's say, and using that to understand …the benefit-cost ratio.
9.88
Given the high costs of building new rest areas, some inquiry participants indicated that there could be merit in government partnering with private sector entities to upgrade or alter existing infrastructure (industrial estates, roadside eateries) to provide for more rest areas.
9.89
On the benefits of government partnering with roadhouse operators, for example, WRF told the committee that:
By co-locating [the rest stop] with a facility where you've got people to both clean it and provide showers—at the same time, people will probably buy food anyway—there's a benefit to the operator, and similarly the industry will probably end up with better facilities.
9.90
WRF added that there may be opportunities to turn existing roadhouses rescue centres (with available food and water) to assist fire and other disaster preparedness going forward. Further, WRF noted that there is no current policy on how to co-locate rest areas with existing facilities, describing this as unsurprising given the diversity of the freight task across Australian jurisdictions.
9.91
Similarly, ARRB saw potential opportunities to leverage private investment on routes with existing infrastructure, stating that:
[I]n my area there is an industrial estate, not far from here, and you often see a lot of truck trailers parked there and the prime mover has either been taken home or maybe it's moving another trailer, or they've had to split the load, because it's not a B-double accessible route they need to get to. I'm surprised there isn't more commercial opportunity for that sort of thing.
9.92
WRF added that there may be opportunities to turn existing roadhouses into rescue centres (with available food and water) to assist fire and other disaster preparedness going forward. Further, the WRF noted that there is no current policy on how to co-locate rest areas with existing facilities, describing this as unsurprising given the diversity of the freight task across Australian jurisdictions.
9.93
The Caravan Industry Association of Australia (CIAA) also saw potential for joint investment by public and private sector entities in rest areas which could be shared between heavy and recreational vehicles, noting that some jurisdictions have begun to explore such arrangements. CIAA’s view was that, in general, rest areas should be constructed on major transit routes and placed in such a way as to effectively manage fatigue. Equally, funding for rest areas should be targeted so as not to encourage competition with or undercutting of commercial caravan park operators—especially since caravan parks are often vital to the wellbeing of the local community.
9.94
Some stakeholders indicated that in funding rest areas it will be difficult to identify areas of greatest need (such as roads lacking appropriate rest areas and areas in need of upgrade or maintenance). To baseline such assessments of need, CIAA suggested the Commonwealth conduct an audit to determine where there is a shortage of rest areas, including to consider whether current rest areas provide necessary facilities for all drivers to rest and recuperate. In a similar vein, the NHVR referenced discussion around an app to permit drivers to rate rest areas.
Sharing rest areas between heavy and recreational vehicles
9.95
A concern for several inquiry participants was the fact that rest stops may be shared by heavy and recreational vehicles, and that this can sometimes limit the ability of heavy vehicle drivers to use rest areas for their intended purpose (to manage fatigue). Accordingly, stakeholders highlighted that rest areas must be designed to accommodate multiple uses, while still prioritising fatigue management for the heavy vehicle sector.
9.96
The Toll Group explained this issue as follows:
When you have people travelling for leisure sharing the same space with people who are travelling for work, inherently their objectives and what they're after [will] clash. If you're travelling, you may be inclined to socialise with other travellers; you want to sit around the campfire at night having a chin wag. For drivers, the major objective is restorative rest, so that they're fit for duty the next day. And then, of course, there's the question of space. Drivers find it annoying when they must stop, legally, at a certain point in time, and there are no rest bays available, and a caravan may be sitting there.
9.97
Similarly, RA and WRF told the committee that sharing rest areas with recreational users can compromise truck drivers’ ability to rest, as recreational vehicle users may not appreciate the dangers of fatigue and may impose themselves on truck drivers. WRF provided the following illustrative example:
[T]here was a triple road train pulling unleaded petrol. He pulled up—he had a mandated rest break. He was lying in his cab and after a while started to smell wood smoke. A couple of recreational users had pulled up in the same rest bay and decided to light a bonfire—a large campfire. He was carrying 90,000 litres of unleaded petrol and he said, 'Can you put it out; I've got to sleep?' They said, 'Oh no, we'll only be half an hour.' He had a mandatory obligation to move the truck and so then he was in breach of fatigue rules.
9.98
From a design perspective, EA advised the committee of the importance of harnessing engineering expertise to develop a best-practice guideline for rest areas to permit sharing between heavy and recreational vehicles.
9.99
While from a cultural perspective, the CIAA spoke to the merit of implementing training for drivers of caravans and recreational vehicles on proper use of rest areas, including sharing with heavy vehicles—highlighting its own Co-Exist program in this regard.
Training and licensing for the heavy vehicle sector
9.100
Training and licensing for heavy vehicle drivers was raised as a concern by several stakeholders, with a consensus that licensing requirements must be strengthened via the addition of risk management training (as opposed to simply operating a vehicle or knowing road rules), strict competency-based assessments, and the addition of ‘soft’ or interpersonal skills.
9.101
For example, the Toll Group said that more should be done to articulate, promote, and assess competencies, attributes, behaviour, and skills, noting gaps between expectations set by licensing systems, the HVNL, workplace health and safety laws, and road rules. In many cases a driver’s formal training is limited to functional competencies required to drive the vehicle and understand applicable road rules. The training does not address safety culture, applying the road roles, anticipating the behaviour of other drivers, or understanding duties in the HVNL. Training related to load planning and mass management, trailer coupling, and load restraint is also lacking.
9.102
In addition, the Toll Group observed that driver training lacks the ‘soft’ skills element needed to ensure safety in the sector, including the confidence needed to respond to unsafe situations:
[Drivers] must have the professional and personal confidence to refuse to cart load that they believe is unsafe or non-compliant. This is no small ask. There is a natural disinclination for employees to ‘bite the hand that feeds them’ and little recognition that exercising the obligation to refuse is an act of leadership.
Leadership, in most cases, doesn’t just ‘happen’. Workers need to be encouraged and coached to see speaking out about safety as a personal, even a moral, obligation. They must also know they will be supported by their leaders and managers if they do speak out.
9.103
ATA, in its submission to the ongoing Austroads’ review of the National Heavy Vehicle Driver Competency Framework (Framework), has raised concerns that registered training organisations (RTOs) often ‘train to a price or time’ rather than to competencies, and that regulation of RTOs is insufficient. ATA noted that there is work ongoing to enhance qualifications in the transport sector, including introducing a two-year apprenticeship.
9.104
NHVR also identified the need to move away from a ‘time served’ approach to licensing, to focus on practical skills, stating that prospective licensees should be required to meet set minimum driving competencies, including fatigue management.
9.105
The need to ensure heavy vehicles can share the road with other users was also raised in evidence, with the National Road Safety Partnership Program (NRSPP) recommending that competencies on road sharing be included in the Framework.
9.106
ARRB told the committee that there should be stricter and nationally consistent licensing requirements for the heavy vehicle sector, and better training for prospective drivers. ARRB also supported the introduction of mandatory intensive training and licensing for holders of international licences before being permitted to operate a heavy vehicle, noting that:
In Victoria, any person who holds an Australian licence for two years may upgrade to drive a rigid truck after just a few hours of training. After another year, the licensee can be eligible to drive a semi-loaded trailer (up to 42.5 tonnes) by passing short written and practical tests.
Training associated with heavy vehicle licensing is often conducted ‘on the job’. This can embed poor habits and high-risk driving behaviours.
Many jurisdictions allow a person to operate a heavy vehicle with an international licence until the person obtains a permanent visa. Some jurisdictions also permit the holders of international licences to operate heavy vehicles even if they fail a driving test as part of the process to obtain an Australian licence.
Workforce shortages and loss of skills and competencies
9.107
NHVR noted that a significant number of heavy vehicle drivers are likely to retire over the next 10 years, with a still greater number of new drivers needed to service freight and transport demand. The NHVR raised concern that this may lead to a skills shortage in the sector—both in terms of pure numbers of qualified drivers and via lowering of competency standards to recruit people to the sector.
9.108
NHVR told the committee that there should be a concerted campaign at all levels of government to encourage younger people to consider the heavy vehicle sector as a profession rather than a fallback. This is not only to address projected skill and workforce shortages, but also to ensure that entrants to the sector will be able to drive increasingly complex vehicles. This would mean programs in high schools to encourage young people to consider the sector as an employer of choice, feeding into tertiary education on heavy vehicle driving.
Driver physical and mental health
9.109
Physical and mental health in the heavy vehicle sector continues to be an issue of concern. A 2018 study conducted by Monash University indicated that truck drivers are more exposed to co-morbidity issues such as longer working hours, sedentary roles, poor nutrition, social isolation, shift work, time pressures, low levels of job control and fatigue.
9.110
Stakeholders emphasised the importance of drivers’ physical and mental health to road safety and suggested some proactive measures that could be implemented.
9.111
For example, NHVR stated that improved information to assist heavy vehicle drivers manage their health and identify warning signs will improve safety. NHVR drew attention to ‘Healthy Heads in Trucks and Sheds’ (HHTS) as an example of a collaborative mental health initiative:
HHTS…aim[s] to increase the number of people trained in mental health at transport and logistics facilities, standardise policies and regulation at transport and logistics facilities, and help individuals be healthier from a diet and mental health perspective. Continued support for such initiatives by industry, NHVR, and governments will help improve mental and physical health in the road transport and logistics sector.
9.112
NHVR added that more could be done to encourage the physical health of drivers—for example by improving the quality of food that is available at service centres and rest areas.
9.113
NRHA told the committee that improving physical and mental health in the heavy vehicle sector also requires cultural change. Using the example of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) to illustrate this, NRHA stated:
[T]he truck industry [is] predominantly male [and] there is a real culture…of not accessing help until it's really needed or until the effects have been noticed or the impact has been noticed…There really needs to be almost a shift in the culture from just sticking it out and not needing help, and not thinking help is necessary, to one where help is accessed and is available from health professionals.
9.114
Injury Matters, referencing its Injury Matters Mental and Physical Safety (MaPS) on Our Roads initiative, emphasised the importance of providing drivers and others in the sector with information on how to identify and manage mental health issues:
[The initiative] is about having an open and frank discussion on mental health and [social connection] and the different things that somebody could utilise. It's about giving people actionable opportunities to be able to work out what would work for them. It's positively worded. It's giving them messages, information, and places they can contact. There's a lot of stuff out there in the marketplace that we're trying to bring together. Sometimes people don't quite know where to start, what might work for them, what's available or whether they should reach out to a particular line.
Suicide in the road transport system
9.115
Some inquiry participants noted that the suicide death of motorists and other road users such as pedestrians by truck collision remains a concern for the heavy vehicle sector.
9.116
The Toll Group estimated that one in five of road fatalities in which its vehicles are involved can be attributed to suicidal ideation. This is consistent with data from NTI and NTARC which shows that in 2020, 43.5 per cent of fatal crashes involving a car and heavy vehicle were found to be suicide.
9.117
Further, the Toll Group recommended that BITRE collect and publish data on suicide in the road transport system, noting that this must use the Mindframe guidelines to ensure sensitivity and to avoid contagion effects. This was necessary, Toll contended, in light of government’s unwillingness to collect and publish the data which ‘almost guarantees’ that this significant road safety risk will otherwise never be addressed.
9.118
NRSPP also agreed that consideration be given to raising awareness of suicide in the road transport system, noting that greater recognition of the issue would align Australia with Sweden—a country generally recognised as a world leader in road safety. In 2012, Sweden introduced a specific method of identifying suicide in the road transport system, confirming that suicides represented around 10 per cent of road deaths there. NRSPP raised concern that little is currently known about suicide in Australia’s road transport system, and recommended the following measures:
Adoption of Mindframe guidelines by industry, media, and government to inform communications about suicide in the road transport system.
Reporting of suicide in transport data be undertaken on an annual basis and disseminated in conjunction with other road safety data.
Infrastructure design and locations be investigated in conjunction with standardised construction protocols to ascertain potential contributing factors between suicide and locations.
Sharing of insights into ‘near miss’ events, to improve knowledge and enhance risk identification and prevention.
Committee view
Heavy vehicle safety features
9.119
The committee has heard that there is widespread support for encouraging uptake of proven safety features, with a particular focus on technology-based features which have been shown to reduce crash risk for drivers and other road users. Relevant features include AEB, lane keep assist, fatigue monitoring, stability control, and cruise control. There is also support for fitment of other safety features such as conspicuity markings, and for measures to lower the age of Australia’s heavy vehicle fleet.
9.120
The committee notes that the Commonwealth—via the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications (DITRDC) and the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR), is taking steps to encourage uptake of proven safety features. In addition, the committee notes that the review of the Heavy Vehicle National Law (HVNL) law is looking to address barriers to uptake of safety technologies. The committee is also pleased that regulating for and promoting heavy vehicle safety features is an action item in the NRSS 2021–30.
9.121
The committee considers that the Commonwealth should continue to support options to expedite rollout of proven heavy vehicle safety features, noting that this could be progressed with measures to expedite mandatory fitment of safety features to all vehicles (such as a regulatory ‘roadmap’). The committee notes in this regard that there is concern at the time taken to mandate Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) for heavy vehicles, notwithstanding issues concerning the fitment of AEB to trucks and trailers. The committee also considers that the Commonwealth, working with states and territories and other key stakeholders, should explore options to increase uptake of newer, safer vehicles and increase their affordability. Measures may include fuel subsidies, registration discounts, and stamp duty concessions.
9.122
The committee is also of the view that conspicuity markings are likely to be effective in improving the visibility of heavy vehicles and thereby reducing crashes at night and in adverse weather conditions. Noting that conspicuity markings are not mandatory across the sector, and that high-visibility rear markings are only mandatory on vehicles over a certain size, the committee considers that the Commonwealth should mandate fitment of conspicuity markings to all heavy vehicles.
9.123
The committee recommends that the Australian Government investigate options to expedite mandatory fitment of proven safety features to heavy vehicles. Autonomous emergency braking and conspicuity markings should remain a key focus in the short term.
9.124
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments to investigate options to incentivise the purchase of newer, safer heavy vehicles and increase their affordability.
Heavy vehicle data
9.125
The committee heard that there are gaps in available data relating to heavy vehicle crashes. Key issues include a failure to capture data on the ‘ancillary’ sector (heavy vehicles which are not engaged on a hire-and-reward basis) and a lack of data on crashes which do not involve death or serious injury.
9.126
Stakeholders indicated that gathering additional data in these areas would support a complete understanding of the road safety concerns in the heavy vehicle sector and development and implementation of countermeasures. Also useful would be the collection of additional data on the type of heavy vehicle involved in the crash as a means of obtaining a more detailed picture of how the crash occurred and to support trend analysis.
9.127
The committee also heard that there is limited data available on the driver at fault in crashes between heavy and light vehicles, notwithstanding the fact that heavy vehicle drivers are not at fault in most of these incidents. Stakeholders indicated that the collection and publication of data would help dispel perceptions that heavy vehicles are predominantly at fault in road crashes involving fatal and serious injuries.
9.128
The committee considers that the Commonwealth should work with states and territories, local government, and with key stakeholders such as the National Truck Accident Research Centre to improve the collection of data on road crashes involving heavy vehicles.
9.129
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state, territory, and local governments, and with other stakeholders such as the National Truck Accident Research Centre, to improve the collection of data on crashes involving heavy vehicles. The committee considers that this should involve the development of mechanisms to collect data on:
the ‘ancillary’ heavy vehicle sector;
the driver at fault in crashes, if this can be established;
crashes that do not involve fatal or serious injury, and may not involve very significant amounts of financial damage; and
vehicle type, age, and relevant safety features.
Formal safety management arrangements
9.130
Evidence from the NHVR indicates that formal safety management systems (SMS) are an effective way of improving safety in the sector, and that the systems appear to be closely aligned with measures to formalise workplace road safety more generally (for example, workplace road safety strategies).
9.131
The committee notes that the NHVR has produced guidance for the sector on developing and implementing SMS and considers that government should take steps to support heavy vehicle operators to adopt this guidance and embed it within their business practices.
9.132
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) to support development and implementation of safety management systems by heavy vehicle operators, including through widespread adoption of the NHVR’s 9 Step SMS Roadmap.
Operator accreditation
9.133
The committee heard there is qualified support for a nationally consistent rating or accreditation scheme for heavy vehicle operators or businesses and sees merit in the government working in partnership with industry and other key stakeholders to develop a system of this kind to incentivise best practice across the sector. The committee considers that there would be merit in the government exploring options to ensure that public contracts with a road transport component are only awarded to operators who can clearly demonstrate that they have safety systems in place.
9.134
A market-wide ratings system for operators, and associated changes to procurement practices, were recommended in the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport (RRAT) Committee report, Without Trucks, Australia Stops: the development of a viable, safe, sustainable, and efficient road transport industry (RRAT Trucking Report). The committee supports the relevant recommendation of the RRAT Trucking Report (Recommendation 9) and makes no further recommendations of its own.
Fatigue management
9.135
The committee heard there is a need to improve fatigue management in the sector, with a focus on permitted hours of service. In addition, stakeholders raised concern that the practices for managing fatigue (including the use of work diaries) are overly prescriptive, and do not permit industry members to manage their own rest.
9.136
It appears that fatigue management is also captured in the ongoing review of the HVNL and the NRSS 2021–30. In addition, the NHVR is progressing work to develop a fatigue risk management standard focussed on classifying and managing key risk factors.
9.137
The RRAT Trucking Report recommends that national laws be amended to incorporate a fit-for purpose national framework for managing fatigue. The report also states that industry must be at the heart of any reforms to ensure that the needs of drivers are adequately met. In light of this, and noting ongoing work to improve fatigue management in the sector, the committee supports the relevant recommendation of the RRAT Trucking Report (Recommendation 9) and makes no recommendations of its own.
9.138
However, the committee does consider that ongoing and proposed work in relation to fatigue management should consider how fatigue is managed in other jurisdictions (such as across Europe). The committee also considers that this work should look closely at the penalties and other enforcement measures associated with fatigue management in the HVNL, with a view to providing support for drivers who are not meeting their obligations and ensuring that drivers are not unduly penalised for minor breaches.
Rest areas
9.139
The committee heard that the Australian road network lacks the numbers of appropriate-designed rest areas to permit heavy vehicle drivers to obtain the rest they need to operate safely. Stakeholders raised concern that rest areas can be difficult to find on long stretches of road, and that existing rest areas are poorly maintained and lack shade, shelter, and female bathroom facilities. The committee heard that the lack of appropriate facilities is a key challenge in attracting more female drivers to the sector.
9.140
state and territory governments appear to have progressed work to increase both the number and quality of rest areas on key freight routes, and plan to undertake audits of existing rest areas with a view to improving public amenity and facilitating access. However, providing sufficient high-quality rest areas may require additional Commonwealth funding.
9.141
The RRAT Trucking Report made several recommendations relating to rest areas, including: adopting national guidance for design and placement of rest areas on major highways and freight routes; working with States to mandate heavy vehicle only rest areas; establishing a national fund to ensure (among other matters) that sufficient numbers of appropriately designed rest areas can be installed; and supporting public education on the importance of rest areas to driver and road safety.
9.142
The committee supports relevant recommendations of the RRAT Trucking Report (Recommendation 9) and—as to the recommendation concerning development of national guidance—notes that the Austroads Guidelines for the Provision of Heavy Vehicle Rest Area Facilities may be a useful model.
9.143
The committee also considers that there may be additional (and cost-effective) opportunities to increase the number of appropriately designed rest areas using Commonwealth funding as a policy lever. In this respect, the committee considers that the Commonwealth should look to make funding for new road infrastructure and major upgrades to existing road infrastructure conditional on plans to install rest areas where appropriate.
9.144
The committee considers that, as part of this work, the Commonwealth should undertake an audit of existing rest areas in partnership with the heavy vehicle industry and recreational sector to identify gaps in the provision of quality facilities and guide future infrastructure investment decisions. The committee considers that there are also opportunities for government to partner with private businesses with a view to co-locating rest areas with existing facilities. This might assist in reducing the costs of providing high-quality rest areas and provide opportunities to improve the quality of amenities (including food) available to drivers.
9.145
The committee recommends that the Australian Government investigate opportunities to make funding for infrastructure conditional on plans to install appropriately designed heavy vehicle rest areas.
9.146
The committee recommends that the Australian Government commission an audit of existing rest areas in partnership with the heavy vehicle industry and recreational sector to identify gaps in the provision of quality facilities to guide future infrastructure investment decisions across all levels of government.
9.147
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state, territory and local governments, and the private sector, to investigate opportunities to co-locate rest areas with existing facilities, underpinned by joint funding arrangements.
9.148
The committee also notes that while the RRAT Trucking Report appears to support measures to ensure heavy vehicle drivers can use rest areas without being distracted or disturbed (for example, mandated heavy vehicle only rest areas), there is less consideration given to sharing rest areas with recreational vehicles such as caravans. According to several stakeholders, this is a growing concern.
9.149
The committee considers that the Commonwealth should develop new or review existing guidelines on designing rest areas to permit sharing with recreational vehicles (as appropriate) without compromising fatigue management for heavy vehicle derivers. In addition, the committee considers that the Commonwealth should work with state and territory governments and with industry stakeholders to ensure that initiatives to increase the number of rest areas considers multiple use issues.
9.150
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments and with stakeholders with engineering expertise to develop guidelines on designing rest areas which facilitate sharing between heavy and recreational vehicles without compromising the ability of heavy vehicle drivers to rest.
9.151
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments and with industry stakeholders to ensure that initiatives to increase the number and quality of rest areas consider multiple use issues.
Training, licensing, and potential workforce shortages
9.152
The committee heard that training and licensing for the heavy vehicle sector continues to be a key concern for stakeholders. Evidence indicates that training should focus on personal safety risks and interpersonal skills (as well as more general competencies associated with operating a vehicle), and that licensing should include strict, competency-based assessments.
9.153
With significant workforce shortages on the horizon, there is also a need to ‘professionalise’ the sector with a view to making it an employer of choice for young people and removing barriers to entry for women.
9.154
The committee notes that the RRAT Trucking Report covered in depth the issue of training and licensing in the sector and made recommendations including mandatory induction training on safety; expediting consideration of the review of the National Heavy Vehicle Competency Framework and licensing arrangements; developing a national apprenticeship scheme for drivers; and implementing programs to encourage young people, women, and people from disadvantaged backgrounds to join the sector.
9.155
The committee supports relevant recommendations of the RRAT Trucking Report (Recommendation 5) and makes no further comment in relation to training and licensing arrangements. However, the committee considers that there may still be opportunities for the Commonwealth to work with state and territory governments across the transport and education portfolios to promote the heavy vehicle sector as an employer of choice. The committee considers that this should involve examples of successful careers in the sector and highlight the more complex elements of heavy vehicle driving.
9.156
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments across the transport and education portfolios to develop and implement targeted campaigns to promote the heavy vehicle sector as a career and as an employer of choice.
Commercial incentives towards unsafe behaviour
9.157
The committee heard that commercial pressures including performance-based pay, lower freight rates, poor working conditions, and unfair contract terms are contributing to lower safety outcomes in the sector. Evidence indicates that many of these pressures are driven by customers of freight companies making decisions based on cost rather than safety.
9.158
The RRAT Trucking Report similarly recognised that financial and contract-based pressures are leading causes of poor safety outcomes in the sector, and that these pressures are driven by clients who set rates of pay and contractual conditions. The report recommended that an independent body be established to set binding standards (including pay and rates), and that the initial priorities of the body be focused on ensuring that workers are paid in full to a degree commensurate with their work. The report indicated that the establishment of such a body is necessary to ensure some level of regulatory protection against low and incentive-based rates which create a structural environment for unsafe work practices.
9.159
The committee supports relevant recommendations of the RRAT Trucking Report (Recommendations 1, 2 and 3), and makes no recommendations of its own. However, the committee draws attention to evidence that rates and other financial incentives are less likely to affect safety outcomes in the ‘ancillary’ sector. The committee encourages governments at all levels to continue to investigate measures to improve safety in this area, noting that better data collection, supporting adoption of vehicle safety features and improving the quality of infrastructure is likely to be a good starting point.
Physical and mental health in the heavy vehicle sector
9.160
The committee heard that physical and mental health continues to be an issue of concern for the sector. Evidence indicates that poor health outcomes are often driven by cultural factors, such as a reluctance to seek help when necessary. Evidence also indicates that there are opportunities to increase the information provided to heavy vehicle drivers on maintaining their physical and mental health—including identifying warning signs.
9.161
The committee considers that governments at all levels should work with the industry to support programs which provide information and resources to heavy vehicle drivers on mental and physical health, such as the ‘Healthy Heads in Trucks and Sheds’ (HHTS) initiative. The committee notes in this regard that HHTS, working with the NHVR, has launched an application to improve ease of access to information, tools, and support relating to mental and physical health. The committee also considers that there are opportunities to encourage better mental health outcomes through targeted campaigns focused on identifying the warning signs of health issues and taking action—including encouraging drivers to seek help as necessary.
9.162
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments, the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator and industry to support development and uptake of programs focused on physical and mental health in the heavy vehicle sector.
9.163
The committee recommends that the Australian Government support targeted campaigns for heavy vehicle drivers, focused on identifying the early warning signs of health issues and acting as necessary.
Suicide in the road transport system
9.164
Evidence indicates that reporting of data on suicide in the road transport system is very limited, and in this respect Australia has fallen behind leading road safety jurisdictions. Stakeholders asserted that without the collection and publication of data on the issue, suicide in the transport system is unlikely to be properly addressed.
9.165
Noting that a significant number of fatal and serious injury crashes appear to have involved suicidal ideation, the committee considers that work should be progressed to collect and report on suicide in the road transport system as a matter of urgency. The committee is mindful of ensuring that collection and reporting of data is undertaken in a sensitive manner, with a particular focus on avoiding potential contagion. The committee considers that once necessary mechanisms are established, work could be progressed to integrate this data into infrastructure and transport planning.
9.166
The committee recommends that the Australian Government develop and implement mechanisms to collect and publish reliable, accurate data on suicide in the road transport system.