BreakerOneNine:
Brakes have driver facing cameras in all their new trucks and have retro fitted to some older ones too. After a while you just forget they are there. I wouldn’t want one if I was tramping though.
At the start the gaffers were reviewing images regularly and disciplining drivers for things like eating an apple while driving. One had a warning because the rear facing camera caught him jumping out of the back of the truck in an unsafe way. Now the novelty has worn off the rarely check footage unless the vehicle is in an accident.
boss has got 10 trucks fitted with 5 cctv cameras and the one that faces me is the only one that switches off when the ignition key is turned off + the camera is mounted on the windscreen pointing at me so when the curtains are closed the camera wouldnt be able too see me anyway. footage is downloaded each week and at end of each month 4 random days are chosen too view and if there is no issues then i get my £100 incident free bonus.
dreamlands2001:
well I hope the one’s in the cabs I’ve been driving this week are only forward facing (outwards) lol, I would have thought that it would come under ‘invading privacy’ rights…
At TP group they are trying to bring it in. All the new units have cameras around it, was meant to have inside cab too however they are struggling with getting over privacy problems.
as well as their other companies they own.
The Rigid’s at our place all have rear facing cameras. The Artic has rear facing camera. And cameras on each side of the wagon so when you put your indicator on it starts recording down the side of the wagon.
I dont mind these as I think they assist the driver, but if they wanted one facing me , it would be used a coat hanger.
Behind all this fancy tech to monitor a truckers every move will be a money saving idea.
Some needless company comes up with a idea, it gets government EU health and safety, save the planet, insurance backing, . It then gets championed out to haulage companies by spotty just left uni reps with fancy statistics look what you could save charts offering big tax and insurance savings and before you know it where on the receiving end.
I drove for a firm with driver facing cams, I think his mindset though was he was a control freak and although there was only about 12 drivers, everyone referred to him as ■■■■■■■■ dave,he had a particular issue with me pulling over and pouring a coffee , a travel mug with lid, and placing it in its holder that was very secure, and to wind him up I purposely used to raise my cup to the camera, in a’toast’ like fashion, and say, cheers ■■■■■■■■
Then I went thru a phase of chucking my jumper on the dash for the lower mounted ones, and lower the the sun blind for the higher ones, he asked why, can’t remember exactly what ■■■■■■■■ answer I gave but I think it referred to him being a ■■■■■. Not a lot was said after that , and even less was said when I got sacked for anything and everything a short while after.
I’ve had forward facing dash-cams, and have been vociferously pro, for years but, like most of the respondents on here, I was not happy to find the new wagon had an in-cab camera.
The bosses made all the usual noises about not spying etc, etc… suffice to say that there were a lot of very loud mutters from all the drivers.
Just over two weeks ago I was involved in a smash with a car. As part of his defence the car driver insisted that I was on the phone at the time of the smash: the in-cab camera footage proved conclusively that I was not.
Suffice to say that I am not quite as ‘Anti’ as I was!
Try looking at the benefits they give you before you start complaining…
Truckulent:
There is no legitimate reason to have a camera trained on a lorry driver all day. I would simply cover it up if it was present.
I would disagree that there is no point to the camera, as from the Employers point of view it is just another way of saving time during incidents and knowing who’s side to take. (Not that I like the idea of this!)
How does a camera pointing at the driver help them to decide who is at fault? If you crash into the back of someone 'cos you’re eating an apple, the apple bit is irrelevant. You’re at still at fault. If you’re using a mobile the evidence will be on the phone bill/records. Cameras on the outside pointing at other traffic make sense. Pointing at the driver, they make no sense at all.
Truckulent:
Most lorry drivers don’t have loads that might attack them though do they?
Another example of, if drivers tolerate it, it will happen. If they man up and stand together and say ‘no’ we won’t have it enforced on us.
You have a very good point, this really is something we should stick together to prevent. There are enough sacrifices for the pay, this is one step too far.
They won’t though. They’ll come on here and moan, but they will tolerate it. Drivers, as a bunch are easy fodder as they have no backbone and can’t agree on anything!!
Did a shift for a small company in the Langley Mill area a few months back and found a camera in the cab, pointed straight at me. It got covered up within five minutes.
No doubt the full timers there put up with it but I wasn`t so keen, so shoved tin foil on it.
This sort of thing will be widespread soon…the cameras, not the tin foil covers. Call it a trust matter, an invasion of privacy (at work?) or whatever you like but its coming. Behave yourself and theres nothing to worry about, is there.
I recently purchased a forward facing dash of my own, which has come in handy for catching a few idiots of late. Is there a real difference ?
Win-Stone:
I’ve had forward facing dash-cams, and have been vociferously pro, for years but, like most of the respondents on here, I was not happy to find the new wagon had an in-cab camera.
The bosses made all the usual noises about not spying etc, etc… suffice to say that there were a lot of very loud mutters from all the drivers.
Just over two weeks ago I was involved in a smash with a car. As part of his defence the car driver insisted that I was on the phone at the time of the smash: the in-cab camera footage proved conclusively that I was not. Suffice to say that I am not quite as ‘Anti’ as I was!
Try looking at the benefits they give you before you start complaining…
My lot had them fitted last year, the ones that activate after heavy braking 7 secs before and after the incident it is recorded.
I have no problem with the out facing one but refuse to have one facing me so it is taped up, I told the boss and nothing has been said to me, the rest of the drivers just moaned among themselves about it, and put up with it without any resistance (or backbone ) as usual, that is up to them.
Win-Stone:
I’ve had forward facing dash-cams, and have been vociferously pro, for years but, like most of the respondents on here, I was not happy to find the new wagon had an in-cab camera.
The bosses made all the usual noises about not spying etc, etc… suffice to say that there were a lot of very loud mutters from all the drivers.
Just over two weeks ago I was involved in a smash with a car. As part of his defence the car driver insisted that I was on the phone at the time of the smash: the in-cab camera footage proved conclusively that I was not. Suffice to say that I am not quite as ‘Anti’ as I was!
Try looking at the benefits they give you before you start complaining…
Phone records would serve the same purpose.
phone records dont really serve the purpose, he may have been holding it but not making anycalls or texts so that wouldnt show on the record
Win-Stone:
I’ve had forward facing dash-cams, and have been vociferously pro, for years but, like most of the respondents on here, I was not happy to find the new wagon had an in-cab camera.
The bosses made all the usual noises about not spying etc, etc… suffice to say that there were a lot of very loud mutters from all the drivers.
Just over two weeks ago I was involved in a smash with a car. As part of his defence the car driver insisted that I was on the phone at the time of the smash: the in-cab camera footage proved conclusively that I was not. Suffice to say that I am not quite as ‘Anti’ as I was!
Try looking at the benefits they give you before you start complaining…
Phone records would serve the same purpose.
phone records dont really serve the purpose, he may have been holding it but not making anycalls or texts so that wouldnt show on the record
Yep he could have just been holding the phone for the sake of it but ‘on the phone’ indicates the phone was being used as well a phone, fair point though a driver facing dash cam could show he was concentrating 100% on the road and not fiddling with said phone also just denying being on the phone would make it a their word against yours situation especially if the phone records showed no activity.
Win-Stone:
I’ve had forward facing dash-cams, and have been vociferously pro, for years but, like most of the respondents on here, I was not happy to find the new wagon had an in-cab camera.
The bosses made all the usual noises about not spying etc, etc… suffice to say that there were a lot of very loud mutters from all the drivers.
Just over two weeks ago I was involved in a smash with a car. As part of his defence the car driver insisted that I was on the phone at the time of the smash: the in-cab camera footage proved conclusively that I was not. Suffice to say that I am not quite as ‘Anti’ as I was!
Try looking at the benefits they give you before you start complaining…
Phone records would serve the same purpose.
phone records dont really serve the purpose, he may have been holding it but not making anycalls or texts so that wouldnt show on the record
Yep he could have just been holding the phone for the sake of it but ‘on the phone’ indicates the phone was being used as well a phone, fair point though a driver facing dash cam could show he was concentrating 100% on the road and not fiddling with said phone also just denying being on the phone would make it a their word against yours situation especially if the phone records showed no activity.
He may also be scratching his head, or ■■■■ or pressing the window down button. If he has an accident, is that then going to be used against him? Quite probably. How do they prove though that he would not have had the accident if he hadn’t been pressing the window down button at the time? They can only assume he may not have had it. Which is not evidence at all.
There is NO justification to film a driver all the time he or she is at the wheel. All the arguments I’ve heard so far, are just the company trying to pass the buck on to the driver…
If they don’t trust the guy or gal enough to drive their trucks without being monitored constantly, then they shouldn’t employ them. Equally, the driver in question should walk, the moment they introduce it.
Too many soft drivers that will tolerate it I suspect.
Companys are fitting these cameras because it cuts there insurance cost, brian yeardly recons he saved 10 grand on his insurance costs by fitting his fleet with them and it only going to get worse as the where there blame there a claim culture is here.
rambo19:
I’m a bus driver.
Camera on me all the time.
You get used to it.
It will happen to lorry drivers as well, and if you don’t like it, you’ll be out of a job.
+1…never a truer word spoken…once the big companys have them,then the insurances will specify it,then were all bolloxd up. by that time though,some smart chap will have found a way to have it recording in a loop so it dosent record you constantly.if someone can make it,then someone can break it…
dieseldog999:
by that time though,some smart chap will have found a way to have it recording in a loop so it dosent record you constantly.if someone can make it,then someone can break it…
scotstrucker:
Companys are fitting these cameras because it cuts there insurance cost, brian yeardly recons he saved 10 grand on his insurance costs by fitting his fleet with them and it only going to get worse as the where there blame there a claim culture is here.
Possibly. But then again, he would say that wouldn’t he?
I think we are getting to the stage where some firms will expect to film you having a ■■■■ in their toilets so that, if the toilet gets blocked up they know where to send the bill to…
And they are moaning that drivers are in short supply at the moment… I wonder why…?
scotstrucker:
Companys are fitting these cameras because it cuts there insurance cost, brian yeardly recons he saved 10 grand on his insurance costs by fitting his fleet with them and it only going to get worse as the where there blame there a claim culture is here.
Possibly. But then again, he would say that wouldn’t he?
I think we are getting to the stage where some firms will expect to film you having a [zb] in their toilets so that, if the toilet gets blocked up they know where to send the bill to…
And they are moaning that drivers are in short supply at the moment… I wonder why…?
is it any wonder there fitting them when everyday on the news there’s a driver somewhere that has had a stupid moment that should never have happened but has and costs the firm he works for thousands which maybe could have been used too give the drivers a wage rise, new units maybe, new trailers maybe.
) as usual, that is up to them.