|
New Democratic Party Dissenting Opinion on
Trucking Hours of Service
By Bev Desjarlais, MP Churchill
NDP Transportation Critic
Recommendation 1 — The 84-hour Work Week for Truckers
New Democrats strongly oppose the institution of an 84-hour work week for truckers, as recommended by the Committee. The evidence heard by the Committee suggests that this is likely to cause hundreds of additional fatalities and thousands of additional injuries each year from fatigue-related accidents on our highways. Most of the victims of such accidents are the occupants of smaller vehicles involved in collisions with large trucks. It is unconscionable that the Committee has ignored the warnings of sleep scientists, safety advocates and professional truck drivers that this proposal will kill innocent Canadians.
The Committee has not challenged the fact that longer driving hours would lead to more fatigue-related accidents, injuries and fatalities. Their only answer to the concerns about the 84-hour work week is their flimsy claim that this is actually an improvement because current regulations theoretically allow drivers to work up to 104 hours per week. This spurious, misleading, red herring ignores the fact that Transport Canada has produced no evidence that any drivers currently do this. While a driver on the current two-week 120-hour shift cycle could theoretically drive 104 hours the first week and 16 hours in the second, all the evidence available to the Committee suggests that virtually all drivers currently work 60 to 70 hours a week. Thus, in reality, the proposed 84-hour week would result in a 35% increase in drivers’ working hours over the current 120-hour two-week cycle. The fact that this would result in a dramatic increase in fatigue related accidents, injuries and fatalities is not in dispute.
Furthermore, if drivers’ hours were actually going to be cut by this proposal, as the Committee claims, then the drivers’ income would also be cut. Yet none of the professional drivers who came to Committee expressed any concern that the proposed 84-hour week would cost them any income. Indeed, the consensus was that the proposal would dramatically increase their hours and potentially cost them their lives.
Recommendation 2 — That the Stakeholders Consider “the issues”
This recommendations is nothing but a weak attempt to pay lip service to the concerns expressed by opponents of the 84-hour work week, perhaps included in the report to salve the consciences of the Committee members who supported the Majority Report. If the Committee were truly serious about bringing the regulations of Canada in line with those of the US, as they stated in paragraph 22, Issues section of the report, they would acknowledge efforts in the US that would see a decrease in hours of service for truckers to 60 hours a week.
Recommendation 3 — The Trial Period
The proposed trial period also does nothing to assuage the New Democratic Party’s concerns about public safety. It is simply not appropriate to use the Canadian public as guinea pigs for a new regulatory regime that is likely to result in the deaths and injuries of innocent people. It is perplexing that the Committee has not proposed a specific timeframe for a review nor does it propose any standards by which to measure the effectiveness and safety of the proposals. Without a timeframe and clear standards by which to measure results, a trial period is useless.
Other Shortcomings
Lack of Consultation: New Democrats remain extremely concerned about the lack of public consultation on this issue. Canadians who share the highways with trucks, as well as the truckers themselves, have a direct stake in this issue and deserve to be heard.
There has also been an attempt by the government to use the fact that one union, the Teamsters, supports the 84-hour work week to suggest that the majority of drivers support the changes. They have conveniently ignored the unequivocal opposition of the two other major trucking unions, the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers and the United Steelworkers of America, as well as the hundreds of non-unionized truckers who have signed petitions and written letters in opposition to this proposal. It is quite clear that the Committee and the CCMTA are not interested in the views actual truckers, or the general public, unless it is what they want to hear.
Lack of Enforcement: It is unfortunate that the Committee did not take a harder look at the enforcement of the hours of service regulations. Canada presently uses an antiquated paper log system that has become virtually meaningless. Witnesses told the Committee that the falsification of records by drivers and trucking companies is common. They propose the use of electronic recorders to prevent and to ensure that regulations are followed.
New Democrats reject the Committee’s tepid claim that more study is needed on the use of electronic recorders. Elsewhere in the world, including the state of California, electronic monitoring systems have been used very successfully for years. Railway locomotives and airliners have used electronic recorders for over fifty years and, in that time, the accuracy of such systems has improved dramatically. Similar recorders have even been introduced successfully in taxicabs in the United States. The Committee should have put public interest ahead of the special interests that seek to circumvent safety regulations and called on the government to make electronic recorders mandatory.
|