DCPC views

[simon]

I voted No to 1 and Yes to 2.
I can see no reason for the Government to extend the deadline. They gave enough warning.
If 50% of drivers still haven’t completed all their dcpd training the companies will also suffer, but qualified drivers will suddenly be in high demand.

Question 2 is very debatable.
For myself, I intend to pay some attention in the 2 days dcpc training I still have to complete, even if it’s only to take the mick out of the course trainer for being a trumpet. By paying some attention I expect to learn something, I will therefore leave better informed than when I arrived.
Will it make me a better driver? I don’t have the faintest idea. I expect a course like SAFED would be of benefit, I doubt a 1 day first aid course would help my driving skills much.

[lonewolf_yorks]

I don’t seem to be able to vote.

Anyway there should be a 3rd question…

Will you be leaving the industry being as you don’t need telling how to do a job you’ve been doing safely for over 20 years and being charged for the privilege? YES in my case

Vehicle and load safety,
Drivers hours regs and road safety,
All good modules and relevant

True, but you should know this before you start, I’m sure I was taught that stuff before I left the yard for the first time

[b1_ggk]

How can sitting in a classroom make me a better driver, I only have to attend, I can fall asleep for the duration and still get my mark as there is no kind of test to say I took any notice, Plus I can sit the same module 5 times over to get my DCPC,
The system is so flawed you can tell its been set up by folk who have zero knowledge about the job.

[simon]

B1 GGK:
How can sitting in a classroom make me a better driver, I only have to attend, I can fall asleep for the duration and still get my mark as there is no kind of test to say I took any notice, Plus I can sit the same module 5 times over to get my DCPC,
The system is so flawed you can tell its been set up by folk who have zero knowledge about the job.

You could also be a complete trumpet.

[loadsofhorses]

I voted NO for the first question. I can’t see the Government will push the deadline back, just because some drivers have chosen not to comply with the law.

There will be more than enough drivers with a CPC for basic services to be covered and if more experienced drivers do not complete the CPC in time, it will give some of the newer drivers who had to complete the initial CPC after September 2009 a chance.

As for question 2, I voted YES, simply because if the training is delivered by a quality provider, it SHOULD be useful.

I do agree there is probably a lot of very poor training out there and the fact that a driver could sit snoozing in the corner of a classroom, attending the identical course for 5 days without assessment is laughable, but there is also good training out there, as Peter Smythe observes.

Like other posters, I did my Operator’s CPC, which was JAUPT approved, so with the addition of the uplift fee, I was able to put the hours towards my Driver’s CPC.

I was paying for the course myself and giving up my holiday time, so it was even more important to me that I got something out of it, rather than just any old course to make up the 35 hours.

I did find it useful. The refresher on driver’s hours etc. did not go amiss and I found it really interesting to find out about the Operator’s view of transport.

From some of the posts on this forum, it is clear that several drivers could benefit from a refresher on the basics

From a personal point of view, I have my Driver’s CPC valid until 2019, I now have the Operator’s National Road Haulage CPC, then I went on to do the International Road Haulage, the National CPC in Passenger Operations and hopefully I’ll get the International Passenger this year, before OCR stop supporting the stand-alone international paper!

I probably wouldn’t have got round to doing all of those unless the Driver’s CPC was required.

Loads of other drivers have done JAUPT-accredited courses they might have put off, such as HIAB, ADR etc., so those drivers who have either invested a little more time and money in their training, or could persuade their employer to contribute, are the real winners here.

It would be nice if the general public realised that truck drivers are true professionals, rather than just steering wheel attendants. Perhaps the Driver’s CPC, if we insist on QUALITY training, could start to promote that concept.

Just about every other profession has CPD - Continuous Professional Development. It would be helpful if we can ensure that driver training reflects this, providing relevant and interesting training to increase a driver’s expertise, rather than accepting second rate, tick-in-the-box tuition.

The CPC industry is worth millions. It’s down to us drivers to insist to being treated as the valuable customers we are and sourcing good trainers, who really want to deliver quality training, to be the recipients of our hard-earned cash and time.

I may not agree with many of the aspects of the Driver’s CPC, but I am determined to make the best of it.

[dessy]

I voted NO to Q1 and NO to Q2! As for my opinion! See my signature!

[lgvtrainer]

Q1 - No. 5 years is more than enough notice to prepare yourself
Q2 - Yes
Question 2 is really the more relevant one.

Rikki-UK:
Q2
Do you believe that the Government’s Driver CPC training initiative will make you a better, more informed driver?

This depends on the quality of the training however to become JAUPT registered, a trainer must prove industry knoledge and some evidence of instructional ability. The following is taken from the JAUPT guide to periodic Training

Trainers’ qualifications and/or experience — the Directive requires that each trainer is
suitably qualified in the subject area(s) they are proposing to deliver. Trainers must present
evidence of knowledge in the relevant subject area and also evidence of expertise in
training/training techniques. Centres must keep comprehensive and up-to-date records of
the trainers they employ in order to demonstrate that they use only appropriately qualified
trainers to deliver periodic training. A comprehensive list of trainers and evidence of their
qualifications/ experience will be required with each course approval application.
Evidence will take the form of:
— Training
- an appropriate training qualification OR
- a certificate of experience from an employer or customer that evidences expertise in
delivering training (see Annex .
AND
— Knowledge- an appropriate qualification in the relevant subject OR
- a certificate of knowledge from an employer or customer that evidences expertise in the
subject being delivered.

So there is no reason for the training to be sub standard. More to the point is how much do the drivers really want to learn something new. I can see that new drivers would feel the benefit more but it is up to the training providers to provide interesting subject material within the framework of the regulations syllabus to keep the drivers interested.

Why would anyone in their right mind want to attend the same course 5 times so perhaps better training material is the key. Most people like learning new things that interest them so book onto courses that sound interesting. Training that leads to additional qualifications interest people especially if it may lead to better pay so ADR, HIAB, Operator CPC might be your best option.

[mike-c]

LGVTrainer:
Q1 - No. 5 years is more than enough notice to prepare yourself
Q2 - Yes
Question 2 is really the more relevant one.

Rikki-UK:
Q2
Do you believe that the Government’s Driver CPC training initiative will make you a better, more informed driver?

This depends on the quality of the training however to become JAUPT registered, a trainer must prove industry knoledge and some evidence of instructional ability. The following is taken from the JAUPT guide to periodic Training

Trainers’ qualifications and/or experience — the Directive requires that each trainer is
suitably qualified in the subject area(s) they are proposing to deliver. Trainers must present
evidence of knowledge in the relevant subject area and also evidence of expertise in
training/training techniques. Centres must keep comprehensive and up-to-date records of
the trainers they employ in order to demonstrate that they use only appropriately qualified
trainers to deliver periodic training. A comprehensive list of trainers and evidence of their
qualifications/ experience will be required with each course approval application.
Evidence will take the form of:
— Training
- an appropriate training qualification OR
- a certificate of experience from an employer or customer that evidences expertise in
delivering training (see Annex .
AND
— Knowledge- an appropriate qualification in the relevant subject OR
- a certificate of knowledge from an employer or customer that evidences expertise in the
subject being delivered.

So there is no reason for the training to be sub standard. More to the point is how much do the drivers really want to learn something new. I can see that new drivers would feel the benefit more but it is up to the training providers to provide interesting subject material within the framework of the regulations syllabus to keep the drivers interested.

Why would anyone in their right mind want to attend the same course 5 times so perhaps better training material is the key. Most people like learning new things that interest them so book onto courses that sound interesting. Training that leads to additional qualifications interest people especially if it may lead to better pay so ADR, HIAB, Operator CPC might be your best option.

Its hard to take anything you say as serious, as you have taken a lot of peoples money and delivered nothing. I know everyone should be allowed to start afresh and they can change, but to be frank, you’re an expert at knowing what the ‘industry’ needs and it generally ends in your pocket. And you’re still ‘advising’ ?

[lgvtrainer]

Thanks for being frank Mike-C. I consider the “expert” comment a compliment.

[harry_monk]

LGVTrainer:
Thanks for being frank Mike-C. I consider the “expert” comment a compliment.

I think maybe that was a backhanded compliment, I suspect Mike may have been suggesting that you are an expert at taking money for courses which were never delivered.

Still, it’s not too late to sell your house and give them their money back.

[tachograph]

LGVTrainer:
So there is no reason for the training to be sub standard.

Actually there is a reason why some DCPC training is sub standard, and that’s because JAUPT are/was more interested in getting money than scrutinising the courses before approving them.

And I’m speaking from personal experience of such a course that was so wide ranging that only a complete idiot would think it could be done to a decent standard in just 7 hours … that is even if the instructor had known what he was talking about

[tazbug]

A few years ago the DSA introduced the hazard perception test which learner drivers had to pass (along with the theory test) before being allowed to take a driving test. All ADi’s had to take, and pass, the HPT before a cut off date to remain on the instructor register, those that did not were removed from the register, ending their career.

To my knowledge, despite outrage from the driver training industry, the deadline was kept and quite a few thousand ADi’s left the industry…I don’t believe the gov’t will extend any deadline for DCPC (maybe there will be 80,000 vacancies after all ).

Being a newbie I will benefit from quality training but I don’t believe it will make me a better driver just provide a better understanding outside of the actual driving aspect.

Tazbug

[waitrose_trucker]

I think it’s a joke how you can sit the same module every year!, if it was a set module covering first aid,vehicle maintenance, tacho regs, h&s with a written exam at the end I can see it being worthwhile.also what is the standard of coc training like in eastern European countries??

[muckaway]

Complete joke. Money making con. Another attempt at non-job creation along with those moronic health and safety masturbators who strive to ruin any half decent job left in this country.

[wiretwister]

LoadsOfHorses:
From a personal point of view, I have my Driver’s CPC valid until 2019, I now have the Operator’s National Road Haulage CPC, then I went on to do the International Road Haulage, the National CPC in Passenger Operations and hopefully I’ll get the International Passenger this year, before OCR stop supporting the stand-alone international paper!

Are you sure about that? I have been working on the understanding that it is 35 hours every 5 years which means you have a DCPC entitlement until 2017 at best.

[wiretwister]

I voted no to question 1 and yes to question 2.

Since i gained my license the drivers hours rules have changed, the WTD has been introduced, trailer connections have, changed trucks have changed. All of these changes have been made and I have had no formal training on any of these so who is to say that I am working appropriately.

So far I’ve done 2 modules in which I DID learn, or more accurately correct false knowledge, and in a couple of months I’ll be doing a defensive driving module. what the final 2 modules will be god only knows but would be surprised if i didn’t learn something even if it is trivial.

[repton]

Wiretwister:

LoadsOfHorses:
From a personal point of view, I have my Driver’s CPC valid until 2019

Are you sure about that? I have been working on the understanding that it is 35 hours every 5 years which means you have a DCPC entitlement until 2017 at best.

He’s right, as soon as you complete your 35 hours you get another 5 years added onto the September 2014 expiry date, regardless of if you do it in 2009 or 2014.

It’s another example of poor implementation, you could have done your 35 hours in September/October 2009 and then not need to do any more until August 2019 giving you nearly 10 years without needing to do any training at all…

Paul

[wiretwister]

He’s right, as soon as you complete your 35 hours you get another 5 years added onto the September 2014 expiry date, regardless of if you do it in 2009 or 2014.

That’s my learning point for today then. 20 mins towards another module

[djw]

Wheel Nut:

tachograph:

truckerjon:

ROG:
I wonder what the fine will be for the UK Govt by the EU parliament if they ignore the current deadline?

Rog, the actual EU deadline is 2015/6. Only the UK have set 2013/4 for the implimentation

Do you have a link to that information ?

Directive 2003/59/EC clearly states that the initial CPC should start September 2008/2009 and as far as I can see the acquired rights only exempt us from the initial CPC.

[quote from Article 14 snipped]

I have the link, but my pc is having a hissy fit, and the file is saved on there. Basically the EU gave us 2 choices, one was when to start it, the other was whether to have an exam at the end, we voted for the shortest period and as an attendance only class.

For PCV, The Europeans have to be qualified by Sept 2015
HGV have to be ready for 2016

The wording in the regulation was something like; “Within a 7 year period”

You’re both right in a way.

The latest consolidated version of Directive 2003/59 is that of 2008-12-11, though the amendments are not germane here.

As tachograph says, Article 14(1) sets a transposition date, which the UK met, and Article 14(2) sets the start date for the requirement to have initial DCPC as 2008-09-10 for PCV and 2009-09-10 for LGV. From those dates, to drive the relevant categories commercially, you either have to have ‘acquired rights’ or pass the appropriate tests (in the UK, Module 2 theory and Module 4 practical).

However, it’s Article 8(2) that determines the date by which a driver has to complete his first 35 hours of periodic DCPC training. This sets the usual deadline as five years from gaining initial DCPC (via the tests or ‘acquired rights’), but gives Member States discretion to set this time limit between three and seven years to align DCPC expiry with driving licence expiry or ‘to ensure the gradual introduction of periodic training’. It was this latitude that Wheel Nut alluded to.

The UK transposed these time limits via Regulation 9 of The Vehicle Drivers (Certificates of Professional Competence) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/605). Regulation 9(1) sets a blanket five year time limit to complete first periodic DCPC - in other words, the UK did not avail themselves of the latitude allowed by Article 8(2)Â of the Directive.

This means ministers have the ability to grant a two year extension ‘up their sleeves’, should it be needed.

This would be relatively simple for the minister to do using her (Justine Greening MP is currently the Secretary of State for Transport) section 2 European Communities Act 1972 power to pass regulations implementing EU legislation. All that would be needed is a brief Statutory Instrument amending Regulation 9(1) of the 2007 Regulations. This would follow the ‘negative resolution’ procedure - the minister makes the regulation and lays it before Parliament. The regulation would become law without further formality unless MPs or peers pass a motion to send an address to the Queen praying for annulment of the regulations before the regulations come into force.

In practice, the minister would make the regulation as late as four weeks before the deadline and no Parliamentarian is going to pray for annulment if an extension is really needed.

However, just because ministers have the power to extend the deadline for two years, drivers should not assume an extension will happen. Ministers could decide to do nothing, and if neither ministers nor Parliament acts, those drivers who have not bothered to complete their periodic training by 10 September 2014 unable to drive LGVs commercially. The deadline in the 2007 Regulations cannot be challenged in the courts; for good constitutional reasons, the courts will not interfere with policy matters, which they leave to the discretion of Parliament and, in areas like this where Parliament has delegated powers, ministers.

If the UKÂ attempted to extend the deadline beyond 10 September 2016 without first securing a derogation from the EU (which would be very difficult to obtain), this would be likely to result in the European Commission referring the UK to the Court of Justice of the European Union under Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. This was the procedure threatened against France to get them to remove their import ban on British beef in the light of the BSEÂ scare that was illegal under EUÂ law (it was a barrier to free movement of goods that was not justified by a valid public health concern). Should the CJEU find against the UK, it has the power to impose a fine under Article 260 TFEU. In practice, the political pressure on the UK would become unbearable long before a fine was contemplated.

The 2014 deadline could have been reasonably predicted in 2003 when the Directive was published, and was confirmed by the UK’s transposition of the Directive in 2007. Drivers have had plenty of warning to comply and should not assume that the government will grant them any latitude if they do not take steps to meet the deadline. There is still plenty of time for everyone who needs to complete their periodic training to do so by the deadline.

Those who fail to complete their training by the deadline only have themselves to blame - you cannot pass your failure to complete the training by the deadline on to anyone else, even if your employer has a responsibility to train you. These two responsibilities are separable in law - you could take action against your employer for their failure, but that is no excuse for your failure to comply with the DCPC regulations.

‘I disagree with the DCPC’ or ‘I think the DCPC is a load of garbage and I don’t see why I should have to comply’ are certainly no defences for failure to comply with the periodic DCPC requirements.

I suspect that the doomsday scenarios of the buses and lorries stopping work will not come true. Transport managers pay increasing attention to the DCPC status of their drivers as the deadline approaches. They will be arranging training for those employed drivers that need it.

There will always be those who miss the deadline, whenever it is set. Bearing in mind we still have some 27 months to go to the LGV deadline, there really is little argument for an extension based on ‘we didn’t know it was coming’.

Drivers minded to resist the regulations should remember they are in a weak position. There is a surplus of LGV drivers at the moment, so there is unlikely to be a shortage of qualified drivers to take over their work if they choose not to comply with the legal requirement of 35 hours periodic training.

Anyone who fails to meet the deadline can regain their rights to drive commercially by completing 35 hours of training, so, with co-operation from the training providers, any shortage of qualified drivers is likely to be short-lived.

[dessy]

djw:

Wheel Nut:

tachograph:

truckerjon:

ROG:
I wonder what the fine will be for the UK Govt by the EU parliament if they ignore the current deadline?

Rog, the actual EU deadline is 2015/6. Only the UK have set 2013/4 for the implimentation

Do you have a link to that information ?

Directive 2003/59/EC clearly states that the initial CPC should start September 2008/2009 and as far as I can see the acquired rights only exempt us from the initial CPC.

[quote from Article 14 snipped]

I have the link, but my pc is having a hissy fit, and the file is saved on there. Basically the EU gave us 2 choices, one was when to start it, the other was whether to have an exam at the end, we voted for the shortest period and as an attendance only class.

For PCV, The Europeans have to be qualified by Sept 2015
HGV have to be ready for 2016

The wording in the regulation was something like; “Within a 7 year period”

You’re both right in a way.

The latest consolidated version of Directive 2003/59 is that of 2008-12-11, though the amendments are not germane here.

As tachograph says, Article 14(1) sets a transposition date, which the UK met, and Article 14(2) sets the start date for the requirement to have initial DCPC as 2008-09-10 for PCV and 2009-09-10 for LGV. From those dates, to drive the relevant categories commercially, you either have to have ‘acquired rights’ or pass the appropriate tests (in the UK, Module 2 theory and Module 4 practical).

However, it’s Article 8(2) that determines the date by which a driver has to complete his first 35 hours of periodic DCPC training. This sets the usual deadline as five years from gaining initial DCPC (via the tests or ‘acquired rights’), but gives Member States discretion to set this time limit between three and seven years to align DCPC expiry with driving licence expiry or ‘to ensure the gradual introduction of periodic training’. It was this latitude that Wheel Nut alluded to.

The UK transposed these time limits via Regulation 9 of The Vehicle Drivers (Certificates of Professional Competence) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/605). Regulation 9(1) sets a blanket five year time limit to complete first periodic DCPC - in other words, the UK did not avail themselves of the latitude allowed by Article 8(2)Â of the Directive.

This means ministers have the ability to grant a two year extension ‘up their sleeves’, should it be needed.

This would be relatively simple for the minister to do using her (Justine Greening MP is currently the Secretary of State for Transport) section 2 European Communities Act 1972 power to pass regulations implementing EU legislation. All that would be needed is a brief Statutory Instrument amending Regulation 9(1) of the 2007 Regulations. This would follow the ‘negative resolution’ procedure - the minister makes the regulation and lays it before Parliament. The regulation would become law without further formality unless MPs or peers pass a motion to send an address to the Queen praying for annulment of the regulations before the regulations come into force.

In practice, the minister would make the regulation as late as four weeks before the deadline and no Parliamentarian is going to pray for annulment if an extension is really needed.

However, just because ministers have the power to extend the deadline for two years, drivers should not assume an extension will happen. Ministers could decide to do nothing, and if neither ministers nor Parliament acts, those drivers who have not bothered to complete their periodic training by 10 September 2014 unable to drive LGVs commercially. The deadline in the 2007 Regulations cannot be challenged in the courts; for good constitutional reasons, the courts will not interfere with policy matters, which they leave to the discretion of Parliament and, in areas like this where Parliament has delegated powers, ministers.

If the UKÂ attempted to extend the deadline beyond 10 September 2016 without first securing a derogation from the EU (which would be very difficult to obtain), this would be likely to result in the European Commission referring the UK to the Court of Justice of the European Union under Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. This was the procedure threatened against France to get them to remove their import ban on British beef in the light of the BSEÂ scare that was illegal under EUÂ law (it was a barrier to free movement of goods that was not justified by a valid public health concern). Should the CJEU find against the UK, it has the power to impose a fine under Article 260 TFEU. In practice, the political pressure on the UK would become unbearable long before a fine was contemplated.

The 2014 deadline could have been reasonably predicted in 2003 when the Directive was published, and was confirmed by the UK’s transposition of the Directive in 2007. Drivers have had plenty of warning to comply and should not assume that the government will grant them any latitude if they do not take steps to meet the deadline. There is still plenty of time for everyone who needs to complete their periodic training to do so by the deadline.

Those who fail to complete their training by the deadline only have themselves to blame - you cannot pass your failure to complete the training by the deadline on to anyone else, even if your employer has a responsibility to train you. These two responsibilities are separable in law - you could take action against your employer for their failure, but that is no excuse for your failure to comply with the DCPC regulations.

‘I disagree with the DCPC’ or ‘I think the DCPC is a load of garbage and I don’t see why I should have to comply’ are certainly no defences for failure to comply with the periodic DCPC requirements.

I suspect that the doomsday scenarios of the buses and lorries stopping work will not come true. Transport managers pay increasing attention to the DCPC status of their drivers as the deadline approaches. They will be arranging training for those employed drivers that need it.

There will always be those who miss the deadline, whenever it is set. Bearing in mind we still have some 27 months to go to the LGV deadline, there really is little argument for an extension based on ‘we didn’t know it was coming’.

Drivers minded to resist the regulations should remember they are in a weak position. There is a surplus of LGV drivers at the moment, so there is unlikely to be a shortage of qualified drivers to take over their work if they choose not to comply with the legal requirement of 35 hours periodic training.

Anyone who fails to meet the deadline can regain their rights to drive commercially by completing 35 hours of training, so, with co-operation from the training providers, any shortage of qualified drivers is likely to be short-lived.