An idea for discussion

[tiggz]

One half of me says good idea, we should have more positive coverage and be respected a bit more and the other half of me says, “TROUBLE”… the trouble part being, the cost, the added training, the legalities of it all, it’s too much work for someone to take on and achieve. I haven’t been in the industry long and everyday i come accross something new which i have to learn to deal with, every day is a learning experience. To be honest with you, i hold a class 1 license, i consider myself to be a professional driver and i will continue to drive in a professional manner, i do not need a guild to put me in that bracket. Don’t get me wrong, i think it is a good idea as i said before, and some aspects of it would be beneficial to the industry, but my license is my certificate in my eyes. I worked hard for my license and i respect it enough to keep it by being professional at all times.

I’m most probably gunna get slated for the above, but it’s my opinion.

Tiggz

[boots_o_lead]

I would just like to point out to all that the EU Driver Training Directive will come into effect and will affect us all. Even if any of the radical politicos get in power and pull us out of the EU. Anyone who thinks that they will not have to put up with an imposed training burden in the future is deceiving themselves.

no offence meant

Jules

[wheel_nut]

I have read this thread from start to finish very carefully and I do agree with it in principle.
I think Simon has got nearest the mark and the Craftsmens Guild or Haulage Professionals Guild should be based more on the lines of the IAM. The Institute of Advanced Motorists could be approached as a starting point.

Yes you will have to pay to be assessed and it is sort of training, That shouldnt be so difficult for us as we are all more skilled than the average Joe.

What would worry me is the fact that it would be a certification that needs administration, a spokesperson and government funding. Who should the spokeperson be?

Someone the RHA used like a retired or disgraced Minister of Transport or some unelected person like Mary Williams of Brake who doesnt have our best interests at heart. No!

I am sure that a body like IAM could help in this and make suggestions. It has to be stressed that it is not a union, but a quality certificate. I also dont want to sound like I am promoting some classrom based training like the French Fimo thing.

Let us say that is was called the Institute of Transport Drivers! The ITD could then be used as an extra qualification, they could negotiate cheaper insurance deals and benefit the operator, whether he was an owner driver or a company director with 300 trucks!

Before anyone responds with “its a driver thing and they dont care about saving the boss money”, If you save them money then wages & conditions can improve.

There is a good example of this type of membership working in the BMF, British Motorcycle Federation, although it is not a quality based membership. To be a member of that gives you access to cheaper parts and services, ferry crossings and many other advantages. They have a spokesman and are listened to in higher government.

The entry into the ITD would have to start with an HGV licence, which slightly goes against the idea as the 7.5 tonne drivers wouldnt be eligible. Maybe the ITD if ever it was set up could be linked to the IAM and have a special seperate assessment for this.

Just my few pennorth!
Thanks for listening

[truckyboy]

It would be a great idea to set up some sort of standards for drivers…and run by drivers…but you will never geta 100% membership because drivers will be drivers…whya lot of them could not be bothered to get out of their trucks to use the toilets…merely just open the door and go…or use the disgusting habit of using a bottle and discarding it either there and then…or out of the window further up the road…had the pleasure of taking the wife out a while ago…we stopped in a services and walked across the lorry park…what a stink…the smell of urine was so strong she was almost ill…my daughter asked what the smell was…and was disgusted when i told her…so drivers need to change their habits before any sort of guild could be organised…
I am willing to start this guild and set it up.it will cost £20 per driver per year…please forward all cash direct to me at `the holiday camp…hawaii…
have a nice day

[ohterry]

Coffeeholic:
I couldn’t agree with you more funnyfut. My reading of this thread seems to say it would be a ‘professional, recognised and certificated organisation’ rather than a ‘union type organisation’ and I think that would be the way forward.

I know if I was interviewing for a driver and they were a member of this sort of organisation they would get the nod, and I would also feel they would be worth paying a higher wage to, over someone who wasn’t.

my thoughts are pretty similar to niels here… if such an organisation could improve peoples perspective of truck drivers and finally get us recognised as proffessionals and not them zb,n wagon drivers. then its got to be a good thing… and as for paying for the privilage , i would rather pay me subs to this type of organisation.(if it ever takes on ) than the rip off unions that are only out for an easy life…

[Lasurazes]

Boots O’Lead:
I would just like to point out to all that the EU Driver Training Directive will come into effect and will affect us all. Even if any of the radical politicos get in power and pull us out of the EU. Anyone who thinks that they will not have to put up with an imposed training burden in the future is deceiving themselves.

no offence meant

Jules

Jules, if we are pulled out of the EU, then their directives wont be anything to us than bog paper mate! They cannot dictate to countries that are not full members. Thats the idea of trying to get out.

[wheel_nut]

This thread has hardly got anything to do with drivers ■■■■■■■ in bottles or having an easy life. It is a good idea to improve the industry and the attitude of the members. If I paid £100 to be assessed properly I would be proud of that fact.

Nobody wants 100% membership. What is needed is the filtering out of the wrong uns!

Surely a driving assessment is the start of that process

[Lasurazes]

Wheel Nut:
If I paid £100 to be assessed properly I would be proud of that fact.

Just a question Malc, who would you be happy to have asses you? and what type of assesment would it be? What if some body thats barely got dry ink on their license and has landed a qual as an assesor is picked to asses you, that have probably forgot more than he know!

How does an assesment make anybody with 20 or 30 + years in on all types of roads, in all weathers and conditions, with a clean ticket and a good track record any better? Sincere question by the way.

[smcaul]

Mal,

Just a quick reply to your bit about assessors, they may not have as much expierance on the road as someone with 20/30 yrs, but then does that mean the 20/30 yrs of driving have been done correctly!? That driver may be causing 20 accidents a day without being involved in them, and the assessor may be able to see that and give some pointers. I find it a constant amazement that very few drivers are willing to accept training/assessment with an open mind, they all seem to assume it will be of detrement to them rather then a benefit.

[wheel_nut]

Mal,
That was why i wrote war and peace about consulting the IAM for guidance. They have trained observers who are able to spot faults and advise.

I dont suppose someone who has got wet ink on their licence would be suitably qualified to teach me or to assess me. That doesnt mean Im perfect, far from it but my 28 years experience albeit with bad habits It is a start on the right road

My post also said that it would be wrong to have some self appointed or unelected spokesman.

We already have an HGV Licence
we are now trying to improve the quality of the driver before legislation forces us to do just that. We may as well be involved in any decision that affects our future

With Respect

[rob_k]

Alasdair:

Rob K:
That’ll be the point where you get your wallet out, Mal

When I made my first post I had a mental list of Trucknet members who would dismiss the idea out of hand and generally think any attempt to make things better is to be sneered at and you were top of the list Rob so you are at least predictable my friend.

Al, I’m glad I fit nicely in that little box of yours.

Fwiw, I don’t recall ever saying on this thread anything to the effect of ■■■-pooing/“dismissing” the idea. Perhaps you would like to direct me ?

Fwiw pt2, if you had really read the appropriate threads like you’ve claimed to have done then you would have seen time and time again the threads that discuss “bettering the job” and “what we should do to make them take notice” (there are plenty of them) and not one of them has gone anywhere.

Everyone agrees that they’re all good ideas that folks put forward (my good self included) but no-one’s interested in putting them into practice so the threads just disappear into the archive like all the others after two weeks and I bet that this one goes exactly the same way.

Sorry if you don’t like what you see above; harsh - maybe, but I tell it how it is, like it or lump it

With respect.

[jb]

fair point that rob. unfortunately alasdair that is how it seems to happen… good ideas come forward but then it dies off after a few weeks never to be seen again. i`m not knocking your idea at all, but without a firm plan and limitless enthusiasm it may die just as easily as the other ones have. good luck anyway. rgds jon

[Lasurazes]

smcaul:
Mal,

Just a quick reply to your bit about assessors, they may not have as much expierance on the road as someone with 20/30 yrs, but then does that mean the 20/30 yrs of driving have been done correctly!? That driver may be causing 20 accidents a day without being involved in them, and the assessor may be able to see that and give some pointers. I find it a constant amazement that very few drivers are willing to accept training/assessment with an open mind, they all seem to assume it will be of detrement to them rather then a benefit.

SMCaul fair play to you old pal, If a driver has a bad record, then yes, I can see the point. But if a driver has a good record, then I cant, if the driver has a good track record, and is doing the job, I dont see the point, I just dont see it.

I’ll put me cards on the table, I’ll take an assesment from anyone that has had more time in the saddle than me, a clean ticket, a wide experience of the job in the real world in all waethers motors and pressures, and a good name with the gaffers for fuel economy/times of delivery/lack of accidents ect. From anyone less, I wouldnt, and I dont see a good reason why I should, what Ive got I earned the hard way on the road, and some qualification dont cut no ice with me Im afraid.

[Lasurazes]

Well, I can see what you mean Malc, and it is horses for courses mate and no mistake. I aint trying to say no to such an idea, as we all have the right to do what we want and believe. Personally, any assesor that wants to asses me has got to have more experience and time in than I have, and a damned better record, as I wouldnt dream of deeming myself fit to asses a bloke thats been on the job longer than me, and has had more experience, so of course, Id never acept it personally. Good luck to those that would.

[boots_o_lead]

I have been putting off adding to this thread until a day off because I want to make the best of putting my points across.

As I have said before, before considering setting up such an organisation the prospective membership should work out just what they hope to achieve. In other words an agenda needs to be set. To do this requires a good cross section of the prospective membership discussing the pro’s and con’s, the aims and objectives. This is as good a description of how the TruckNetUK forums operate as any.

One point that has been mentioned is that similar ‘good ideas’ have been raised in the past only to die out after a few weeks. But why? Each idea has proponents and detractors and it seems that the proponents get disillusioned by the detractors and drop their ideas as ‘not worth the aggro/effort.’

I think that this is a shame as it perpetuates the status quo of this industry — low pay, lack of respect, shoddy treatment of drivers by employers. The only way to keep the ideas alive is to keep discussing them until a resolution is found, that means both ‘for’ and ‘against’ staying involved until there is nothing left to discuss and agreement is reached. Then, and only then, can any ideas hope to progress into reality with a reasonable level of support.

The best way, as I see it, to keep this discussion flowing is to break it down into constituent parts. By raising and discussing specific points separated out of, but each an intrinsic part of, the whole idea we could then build up a framework for any proposed guild which most members would, hopefully, see as being of benefit to be part of.

I think this idea is worth pursuing so, with the exception of a total lack of response, I intend to try to keep it alive. If anybody wants to join in or make their own suggestions feel free to do so, I’m not trying to dictate my ideas at anyone. If you have a counter-argument then you need to make your case so that we can try to find an area of agreement.

Doing nothing is always an option, in which case you get what you deserve — usually nothing.

Jules

[boots_o_lead]

As a starter for ten, I’m going to take a look at one aspect of setting standards —

TRAINING

As has been mentioned in numerous threads, you get your licence and then you start learning the job. This argument validates the need for training, even if you don’t associate the two. It is, perhaps, unfortunate that in the modern world whenever someone mentions training the picture that springs to most minds is that of a bunch of people, usually dressed differently, spouting off jargon and waving around fancy graphics which don’t seem to relate to the job in hand.

But what does training infer? It should mean that a certain amount and type of information is passed on to someone in an effective manner so that their knowledge and ability is enhanced, usually with a check to ensure that the information has been assimilated.

There are two ‘standard’ methods of achieving this either learning from somebody in the know at the workplace as and when required, on the job training, or in a formal arrangement usually referred to as a course generally held outside the daily work environment.

As an example; you turn up for a job using a curtainsider and you don’t know how to tension the curtains or operate the buckles until someone shows you. This is fine as long as you are using the same system but what happens when you come across a different tensioning system, or a different type of strap and buckle. You can always try and work it out for yourself or get someone to show you how, but what if you get it wrong? What if the other guy does it the wrong way? What’s the boss going to think if you damage his equipment because you don’t know what you’re doing? What do you do if you injure yourself because you don’t know how to operate the equipment safely?

You may think the example is simplistic but this is a case of knowledge you could reasonably be expected to know as a professional driver. It’s no good dismissing it by saying that you run fridges/containers/tankers/tilts because one day you might be called on to use a curtain.

The same goes for the other type of bodywork. I hear of people talking about stripping out tilts, I’ve seen them but I don’t know how to do it, or perhaps more importantly how to do it safely.

A structured training course allows you to learn what you need to know so that the job becomes easier and safer. If the course is regulated by the organisation that sets the standards then you know the information is valid and useful.

I’ve followed what Marlow has been doing with STS and I think it’s a great set-up. He’s obviously made sure that all the bases have been covered and all the safety aspects have been thought through. And yet all he has done is formalised the ‘on the job’ training into a structured course so that anyone wanting to work in that sector can go and learn how to do the job right. If the ‘guild’ is set up who’s to say that he isn’t the man to set the standard for that sector?

More tomorrow…….

Jules

[robb39]

No need for a ‘retest’.
Must prove you have had three years experience in the industry (and a lgv licence).
Then sit a multiple choice exam on loading, load distribution, drivers hours, safety, good road manners etc.(You don’t have to be a good writer to be a good driver)

Then receive your certificate as a member of Professional Truckers Guild.
You could then have qualified tipper driver, tanker driver, hazardous goods driver, reefer driver etc. -additional tests. Proof of experience in each to qualify for exam
With little sheilds/patches to sew onto your jacket like boy scout badges

These should be renewed through continued personal development CPD (like nurses)- a bi-monthly journal (latest -law changes, equipment etc) released by professionals with a CPD article followed by a series of multiple choice questions submitted by post = 20 points over 3 yrs failure to keep up to date you loose your professional standing, and have to retake the exam.

This would have to be recognised throughout the industry so that employers would give precedence to those who have bothered to become professional.

Professional = More pay. mmmm

Yes it would work but it would take some organizing. and would be paid for by fee for initial exam then a fee to renew after three years.

If you don’t do it that way -just another qualification you pay for.

I’ve worked in the industry for 18 yrs and been involved with it for longer and I’m sorry to say from the most of the drivers I’ve met it’s got no chance.

Without attacking drivers they’re half the reason this industry is so (zb)up.

Why do you think most of 'em don’t come on here

edited for languagemisspelling words gets it past the censor not the admin though mrs mix

[kate_hasler]

robB39:
These should be renewed through continued personal development CPD (like nurses)- a bi-monthly journal (latest -law changes, equipment etc) released by professionals with a CPD article followed by a series of multiple choice questions submitted by post = 20 points over 3 yrs failure to keep up to date you loose your professional standing, and have to retake the exam.

I’m not a driver, so I hesitated to make the point… but I don’t know of many professional careers involving licences that do not require some form of continued training in order to maintain the licence. I’m a nurse, my licence is valid for periods of 2 years, then has to be renewed. In order to renew it, I have to work a certain number of hours within the licencing dates, and complete inservices with testing on updated information. Failure to do this results in revocation of my licence… no matter how much I may have been working. It’s a similar concept… the further away we get from our training, the easier it is to take short cuts and to drift away from the regulatory ways of doing things… this type of thing keeps ya on your toes and keeps you updated on the changes in regulations and procedures. Not a bad idea.

Thing is, these threads DO disappear. Its one thing for people to write about it… or to read it and agree. It’s a whole other thing for someone to get off their butts and put there money and time where there mouth is.

[tc]

I don’t see training very relevant at all! Not for a guild of drivers anyway!
The day we pass our test and let’s face it…it has been said on Trucknet quite a few times before, the UK HGV test is the hardest driving test in the world.

A driver’s guild should be about what drivers as a group want! Not what the employers & government want. If we need extra training then our employers should pay for it!

What I see the Guild as is an organisation where it insists that employers meet the standards that we set before any member works for them.

To start

1 employer’s must provide the correct PPE as an employers cost.

2 Health & safety regs are strictly adhered to.

3 All class of driver are on the same hourly rate per company. E.g. C+E all one rate, C all one rate, 7.5’s all one rate. We would not of course dictate what that rate is supply and demand & local rates would dictate this.
Other drivers who are not members of the Guild could agree their own rate.

4 All truck expenses are met by the employer including the cost of parking the truck.

5 And one I would like personally is that no driver has to work for more than 5 days in a row.

I am sure they could be quite a lot more added and some of my list removed but that’s the point of debate.

Of course to achieve this we would have to provide something to employers that we currently do not provide! Otherwise why would any employer listen?

Well safety in numbers is one thing we could provide! As well as a good driver record, employee record as well perhaps? We could easy keep a data base of members and all training completed even miles drove without mishap!

Lets not dismiss this ideas are wanted/needed to keep this going.

[boots_o_lead]

First of all, I’ll respond to some of the points brought up by robB39.

No need for a ‘retest’.
Must prove you have had three years experience in the industry (and a lgv licence).
Then sit a multiple choice exam on loading, load distribution, drivers hours, safety, good road manners etc.(You don’t have to be a good writer to be a good driver)

I agree that there is no need for a ‘retest’, but there may be an argument for an assessment — more on that later.

I’m not so sure about the 3 years experience and an LGV licence. What about people just starting in the business who want to get it right, who are willing to learn more than just how to drive a vehicle and want to apply a professional attitude from day 1? And what about those who don’t hold an LGV, the 7.5t drivers and the van drivers who are willing to display the same level of professionalism as the LGV licence holders?

You could look at a system of different levels of membership, like the old apprentice/journeyman/master system which would allow new drivers to get the training and adopt the right attitude from the start. This could then be used to overcome the ‘must have 2 years experience’ hurdle that a lot of employers and insurance companies use which forces many new drivers into less desirable jobs/wage conditions.

I agree that a multiple choice exam system should be used. The training/qualification should also be modular, with a set amount of ‘basic’ modules being the entry standard — more on this later.

You could then have qualified tipper driver, tanker driver, hazardous goods driver, reefer driver etc. -additional tests. Proof of experience in each to qualify for exam

How can you have proof of experience when you need knowledge to do the job? For example, you can’t drive haz goods without an ADR but the ADR is just the ‘basic’ qualification. Once you have the ‘basic’ qualification you can the go and gain the experience. This would indicate the need, in some cases, to have a multi-level qualification standard. You start with the basic qualification then, after some experience, you take the advanced level which could contain more info on the theoretical/legislative side.

For reefers you need to know how to set and operate the fridge unit, for tippers how to operate the tipper body. This is all basic information you should know before you start.

CPD is the standard in all professional institutions/organisations so it is the only way to go. However, the current state of computers and the internet means that a lot of the updates/assessments could be carried out online. This should minimise the overheads which would allow the organisation to keep the fees required to a reasonable level. There is no point in raising fees to exclusion level - that’s not professional, it’s elitist and that’s not the name of the game.

Kate:

Thing is, these threads DO disappear. Its one thing for people to write about it… or to read it and agree. It’s a whole other thing for someone to get off their butts and put there money and time where there mouth is.

I agree to an extent, but…… I could pontificate about my ideas and ignore the dissenters, then with a little support I could set up an organisation to do things my way — but I think, without wishing to cause offence, that this has been done before. And it’s not getting very far.

I think it would be better to thrash out a framework for an organisation before trying to set it up. If you build your membership before you start you have a better chance of achieving your aims.

And so to training part 2….

Jules