Rate this!
Geoff Porteous
Member - 20 posts
This is pure speculation as are most of the comments posted about this new act, as long as companies have policies and procedures on safe driving, speed limit adherence, mobile phones etc etc, the contolling mind in that organisation will not be prosecuted under this act unless , they are proven to be negligent in managing their H&S issues, ie that they conived, consented and condoned a dangerous practice that led to the death of a person, i believe that road deaths attributed to a company driver driving recklessly would be of the more difficult to level at a director who has all of his policies and systems in place (unless he was in the cab at the time) also remember that the offence of causing death by dangerous driving has not been replaced by the act and will render a driver (employed or not ) guilty if recklessness is proven on police investigation and subsequent CPS recommendations,until a precedent is set i find all this scare mongering unhelpful and irresponsible.
Rate this!
Anne McAllister
Member - 115 posts
Im not 100% sure but I recall seeing something in my local newspaper indicating that it is an offence also to use the hands free kit while driving.
If you are talking on the phone you are not fully concentrating on your driving (so it says)
Lets face it..how many calls made and taken while driving cannot wait until a safe parking area is found?
Rate this!
RUSSELL HILL
Member - 27 posts
As approximately four times more people are killed at work whilst driving than all other workplace deaths added together it is logical to think that the first successful case will involve a driving incident. Geoff you are right there is too much scare mongering going on. However on the other side of the coin I visit companies every week to talk to them about the CM act and workplace driving. You would be amazed at the level of ignorance out there. I would say about 50% of people i speak to have no idea what the CM act is or how it will affect them and some of the rest think as it says corporate it doesn't mean us as we are only a small company. As members of this forum we are not only aware of it but also understand how it will affect everyone. Please don't think everyone does because they don't.
Rate this!
Emma McAuley
Member - 9 posts
I would agree about the level of ignorance (or sometimes pure arrogance) that exists surrounding this issue. After completing some initial awareness work around using mobile phones whilst driving I was amazed to hear senior managers express beliefs that it is not unsafe to text on a mobile phone whilst driving and others steadfastly claiming that they have never been distracted from giving 100% concentration to their driving whilst taking or making a call on their mobile (handsfree or not).
We have taken the "drastic" measure to prohibit all mobile phone usage whilst driving for our employees, even using handsfree devices. Although this was initially an unpopular decision, it is proving that people can manage their time better if required and also giving people the space to concentrate on driving and taking more regular breaks (as checking phone messages has proved to be a more compelling reason than being tired!!)
I know that many people have the view that there is scaremongering going on about the potential for vicarious liability for organisations where an employee causes injury or death by dangerous driving when on business. I however, do not see it as very far fetched that someone may wish to prosecute or sue an organisation who permits unsafe driving practices and then tries to pass the buck when an employee runs someone over.
Rate this!
James Fairchild
Member - 210 posts
This guy seems a total idiot, but I bet he's right.
Rate this!
James Fairchild
Member - 210 posts
Sorry, McGavin referred to in the article. Not you Russell!
0 (0)
