My apologies Rob for singling you out for a PM. I’m sure I’m not alone when I say it’s easier to deal with one at a time.
I will therefore join the open discussion with my edited PM to you Rob. The topic is roughly ‘Young people being well aware of the pitfalls surrounding in-cab camera’s and why this may put them off driving a lorry in the future.’
Please feel free to skip this post if the topic bores the socks off you.
I’m beginning to realise that my article below didn’t go deep enough regarding telematics and young drivers.
transportoperator.co.uk/2017/06/ … veillance/
Well known fact. The number of young drivers joining and remaining in the for hire and reward transport industry has significantly fallen when compared to the 70’s, 80’s and early 90’s. Retaining young drivers, even in areas of high unemployment, in the current climate has proved to be even harder than training them.
Retaining young drivers is just as problematic. This is the case even around transport hubs such as Rugby/Northampton and Milton Keynes where there is no comparative industry offering so many vacancies to compete against.
The young drivers that choose to remain in the industry today therefore aren’t representative of all young people. They’re the real exception.
I think it’s accepted now that the vast majority of young people aren’t attracted to driving trucks for any one of a number of differing factors. The widespread introduction of telematics is just one such factor – but I agree not the only factor.
So why are young tech savvy people put off by telematics?
One of the main reasons is control. Young people are used to controlling their own and other people’s data. Watching an individual in a candid camera gaff on YouTube is ok but being filmed making the gaff isn’t, especially if it can get you in to trouble.
Transport companies are often accused of running unsophisticated management systems. Managers can have a dim view of drivers. There is evidence to suggest that managers are accessing inward facing cameras from their phones or on their home computers to check up on random drivers. They can also single drivers out and collect data for disciplinaries. The power to do so appeals to them. These managers may also be the sons and daughters of overbearing family run firms with no management training whatsoever.
The storage and security of the data then becomes an issue. The penalty for data breaches are high but the remedy process and procedure can take years. When you consider a sophisticated glass fronted company with a garden and water feature that stores its own very sensitive commercial data, it will employ an ex-bank or such like data security expert to manage the company’s data security system.
A transport or logistics company with its piles of flapping shrink wrapped pallets, some old uncollected machine in a corner and a fork lift tipping a load of ruined stuff into a skip is not in the same salary league as the above company. They won’t be employing any data security experts. It’ll become another overworked office admin role because let’s be honest all the data contains are the faces of loads of different agency driver or short term turn over employees who the company can’t trace anymore. It may be personal but it’s not financially or commercially sensitive.
I’ll give you a comparison and stop groaning… Before the 1970’s printing ■■■■■■■■■■■ was a crime. In the 1970’s new technology allowed smaller printing presses to be sold to private businesses (in many countries presses previously required a licence). A Swedish pornographer called Berth Milton produced a magazine called ‘Private’. The Swedish Police raided his printing press and threatened to prosecute him. The Swedish Police were faced with a problem. It was ■■■■■■■■■■■ alright, but the ■■■■■■■■■■■ was so easy to produce that they couldn’t prevent it being printed there or somewhere else on similar small cheap presses any more. They didn’t prosecute as they could see that in the future anyone anywhere could do it and chasing them would take up their time. Also, the market for ■■■■■■■■■■■ was so big that it ceased to become shocking anymore.
By comparison, in regard to the mass replication and trade in data between 2008-2013 the UK Crown Prosecution Service made a grand total of 3 data security prosecutions! (see link below).
corderycompliance.com/blog-d … secutions/
Unfortunately, in many cases drivers aren’t held in much regard. So much so that data collected about them isn’t realistically viewed as being ‘theirs’ but rather the company’s. Drivers personal data is likely to publicly surface in the future. It’s a shame but the police or anyone else won’t be booking months of overtime because footage of a driver picking his nose has been uploaded as worthless entertainment to social media.
In general, young people like to choose what they upload and see of themselves on social media. They, as well as just about everyone else, don’t like personal footage of them appearing on-line without their consent. Young people generally use social media to manipulate their image for the better. It’s a sad fact that the most popular transport related internet footage watched by young people contains footage of trucks and drivers in trouble or causing accidents that sent them to jail like these ones below.
theguardian.com/uk-news/vid … hcam-video
derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/l … ton-185354
youtube.com/watch?v=u4qhVsXnYAc
The reason why so many people view clips like these above is because they are released into the public domain after being submitted as evidence during court cases. There is little else in road transport except this sort of thing to interest anyone, let alone young people.
We’re getting towards the end now but hasn’t it struck anyone that not many of today’s young drivers choose to post on this site?
Dork Lard’s post above this one has a number of good points. Dork Lard says:
What purpose do driver facing camera’s hope to serve?
What problem are they attempting to solve?
Is it to scare the driver with the fear of repercussions if they are not operating the vehicle correctly?
Has any driver who has them fitted EVER been offered feedback & advice about their driving habits?
In UK law you are innocent until proven guilty. When/if you are involved in an incident where evidence is sought & required then these camera’s are a very good way to prove your guilt. They cannot prove your innocence so you do not need them to attempt to prove your innocence.
As a driver, they can only work against you. They can only ever be used against you.
But, if you have nothing to hide . . . .
I agree with Dork Lard! But additionally, as far as young people are concerned I’d say that it’s not all just about hiding today’s or tomorrows immediate actions that drivers have to worry about. There are the long-term consequences to think about too. The way employers will use data in the future isn’t fully developed yet. Today data on drivers is stored by companies that have already demonstrated by fitting driver facing camera’s in the first place that the company has little or no respect for a driver’s privacy. These same companies don’t seem to have any system in place to alert managers as to when a driver is doing anything right or wrong except when a death on the road takes place. All this is upheld by an unsophisticated industry with a terrible image problem.
Finally, this Russian Website is well worth a read. There’s some eye opening video footage in it too plus a glossary of terms like железобетонное очко meaning ‘■■■■ of Concrete’ applied to someone who doesn’t flinch when faced with danger!
jalopnik.com/why-russians-are-o … ms-5918159
This is my case for inward facing camera’s being a factor for putting young recruits off taking up lorry driving. It’s hardly ground-breaking news!
…thats another one they’ll come out with if the company protection ■■■■■■■■ meets with resistance., half the time the company needs protecting from incompetent pointy shoes all looking to justify their often non jobs.
