The recent conviction of a Christchurch based transport operator resulting in a fine amounting to almost $400,000.00, on top of a previous reparations payment of $150,000.00, just underlines the fact that a fleet management programme must also include management of all risks associated with the transport operation, not only on the road but in both the operator’s and the customers’ yards.
As a transport operator your Fleet Management system will have been your primary compliance tool, however, fleet management is no longer just about making sure your vehicles are safe and compliant, although this should be a major focus for any company committed to retaining their TSL, but is also about managing how both your fleet and your drivers interact with customers, the wider community and their operating environment.
To achieve this your fleet management system must work in conjunction with, or preferably include, your other management tools and their associated policies, such as your Environmental Management System and your Health and Safety Management System, to provide a co-ordinated approach to managing all the risks associated with your business.
A stand alone Health and Safety System is unlikely to cover all your fleet compliance requirements under the Land Transport Act or NZTA Rules any more than a Fleet Management programme without a comprehensive health and safety component will cover your responsibilities under the current Health and Safety at Work Act
You cannot assume that just because your staff are experienced they will be able to avoid harm by being ‘safe’. It is essential that your health and safety policies, incorporated in your fleet management programme, recognise the extra risks posed by a transport operation with all its moving plant , loading, unloading and storage. after all, the victim in the recent Christchurch case was a widely experienced 52 year old who had various responsibilities within the organisation including Workshop Manager, Driver Trainer and Mechanic, when he was crushed by steel pipes in the company’s yard. In this case the court stated that the accident was preventable but no safety measures had been put in place for handling the pipes.