dieseldog999:
all thats going to happen is 1 by 1 the older drivers wil refuse,tell them to do one,and leave,eventually getting phased out altogether.the newer younger drivers will accept it as the norm,bend over and take it in shovelfulls.tachos,digicards,dcpc,no smoking,just take it or leave.10pence off a trucks insurance,and a cameras going in.
And the younger incomers would prob see it as a badge of honour given the tendency to be constantly posting moronic selfies etc on social media across the social spectrum,mass deluded egotism rules the roost these days it seems.
pierrot 14:
Maybe the bosses should concentrate on putting CCTV in the offices, to check on all the office employees that are busy Googling, E-Baying and just generally using office computer time to surf on the internet for their own affairs, instead of … answering
THE BLOODY PHONE when a driver calls.
I don’t think anyone has ever killed a person or persons by Googling or E-baying or using a computer or mobile phone in any way, or for any reason while driving a desk!
The tone of all the responses to this thread would seem to suggest that inward facing cameras are not very well received.
Personally I can’t help thinking it would be something of a travesty if the driver who killed a mother and her 3 daughters on the A34 had escaped full justice, along with a harsh sentence acting as a warning to others, because a driver facing dashcam hadn’t been fitted.
Without the evidence of the cam he could have easily denied his gross recklessness and claimed something else had happened that distracted him, I believe his first comment was his brakes had failed, regardless of that the list of possible excuses as to why he ploughed into stationary traffic without the existence of the cam evidence are almost endless, and with a decent barrister many of them could possibly result in a far more lenient sentence.
I for one wouldn’t be happy to think he’d escaped justice because of the lack of evidence, and I’d like to think most here would feel the same, but as long as irresponsible idiots who believe themselves to be above the law, and have no sense of their responsibilities, are granted licences to drive trucks then I’m happier knowing somebody is doing something to ensure that these idiots are monitored and hopefully too scared of the consequences of a driver facing dashcam to do anything as stupid as looking at, or playing with a mobile phone while driving.
Obviously I’m fairly confident no one here would do anything so reckless, but unfortunately an employer can’t rely on every driver in their fleet being the cream of the crop, and I imagine it would be deemed extremely unfair to only fit driver facing cams to the trucks of drivers that they have less than 100% confidence in.
As much as i’d rather not have them, I still can’t get that worked up about inward facing cameras, assuming they are implemented fairly (only recording when the vehicle is in motion). Sorry, but the “they should trust us” argument is total BS given that thousands of HGV drivers everyday are ■■■■■■■ about behind the wheel doing stuff they shouldn’t. Collectively, the trust isn’t being earnt.
I’ll say one thing though, these cameras aren’t is anyway there for our benefit. Just wait and see what happens if your involved in an incident, the camera footage will be examined and god forbid your seen yawning, putting a mint humbug in your gob or changing the radio station or whatever in the lead up to the event, they’ll have you over the table. Where it suits, any straws will be clutched at to attach blame to the driver.
pierrot 14:
I’m all for Dash-cams to protect against cfc scams, to give evidence to protect the driver in an accident, but inward? In my opinion a bit in your face.
Maybe the bosses should concentrate on putting CCTV in the offices, to check on all the office employees that are busy Googling, E-Baying and just generally using office computer time to surf on the internet for their own affairs, instead of … answering
THE BLOODY PHONE when a driver calls.
I think you might find that when it comes to it the camera is there to protect the company and not the driver. I’ve come across these posts before elsewhere and also come across companies who use them.
They will become the norm and we probably can’t escape it. There are far too many bend over and take it yes men who are in debt up to their eyeballs, and too scared to say no and walk. Couple that with the surplus of available drivers, and if you don’t like it, we’ll get someone who will…
And it will be one rule for you, and one rule for the office staff who won’t be scrutinized in such a way, as watching them won’t be a clear and concise saving on a balance sheet for an accountant to mull over.
Our firm has a zero tolerance drugs policy, and that is supposedly across the board with partial random testing to ensure no one is targeted and therefore persecuted. Or that’s what we are told! Yet our main depot had a hit a few weeks ago where EVERYONE was tested, and they lost about a 3rd of the warehouse/plant staff, just as out busy period starts…
But surprise surprise they didn’t test a single office worker!
George Orwell would be ■■■■■■■ himself if alive today!
4 legs good, 2 legs bad…
As for camera’s we don’t have any, not even outward facing ones which I’ve no objection against. I’d actually quite like one as I think it would be to my benefit and probably aid my defense, just as it did for the moaster. (How’s that going by the way pal?)
Radar19:
Our lot are planning to put them in. Its all kicking off now, The penny pinching has started. Trucks are being put down to 52, cameras facing drivers to lower insurance, we’re now paid according to the tacho, not the time sheets anymore. They are doing this is cut down on driver overtime because they way they plan the runs you won’t be seeing anymore than 11 hours maximum. The day they bring in the cameras I’m gone, handing notice in. Its like the don’t trust us anymore.
As for the pay by tacho rather than time sheet , you’ve only got your self and other drivers to blame for that by taking the pee and creative time inputting
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I think the biggest thing is that our compliance guy now has a stack of time sheets that don’t match with the tacho records so that counts as not having accurate records. He’s basiclly said to us that the times we put down on the timesheets must be the same as the tacho records so if you pull your card at say, 06:43am but you know you’ll be doing at least 15 minutes ish ■■■■■■■ about with paperwork in the office etc so you put down 07:00 he wants us to input that as a manual entry on the next shift so it will appear on the tacho records. Too many drivers with 15 to 20 minutes each shift missing when you compare timesheet vs tacho.
Strange, innit? One of the greatest evils of Soviet-era Communism was the relentless surveillance of citizens going about their lawful business, yet when the same thing happens here on a scale Stalin could only have dreamed of, somehow it’s all fine and dandy.
The case mentioned to justify this, where a young Mother and her kids were killed by a ■■■■ whit unsuitable to hold a HGV licence, was absolutely tragic, but to be harsh it is not a weekly occurrence.
I would strongly object to being filmed therefore tarred with the same brush as that character.
Be more driver selective rather than penalising those who are responsible drivers.
I’m surprised the bending over ‘‘If you are doing nothing wrong’’ crew have not commented on here yet.
Harry Monk:
Strange, innit? One of the greatest evils of Soviet-era Communism was the relentless surveillance of citizens going about their lawful business, yet when the same thing happens here on a scale Stalin could only have dreamed of, somehow it’s all fine and dandy.
The Stasi didn’t bother dressing it up as they could do what they wanted.
Our populous can be a bit stupid, give something a label and They’ll swallow any old pill. Just slap a label on that appeals to “fairness” or “equality” or “safety” and the pre trained non thinkers will buy it. If anyone doubts how we’re being sculpted has anyone watched or listened on radio to the neutral BBC output lately? It’s like a finger wagging sales channel. Cracks me up
"I don’t that the uk has gone a bit surveillance mad, mind you that particular camera is in the name of fairness, that’s ok then "
We have these on some of our buses and it seems to be when it helps the company they’re working fine and when it helps the driver,“sorry son,we can’t release that footage”.
Juddian:
You don’t see an individual camera pointed directly at the bosses, receptionists, HR’s, admins, TM’s nor any other buggers clock over their desks, nor will you see one sitting in their company cars pointing at the interior.
pierrot 14:
Maybe the bosses should concentrate on putting CCTV in the offices, to check on all the office employees that are busy Googling, E-Baying and just generally using office computer time to surf on the internet for their own affairs, instead of … answering THE BLOODY PHONE when a driver calls.
Plenty of office workers are monitored, and they have their internet and emails use monitored and there are cameras in offices, mainly for security, but they can be used to see who is doing what and they can also block access to various websites like facebook, it’s done where I work at the moment. They can also check emails and not only for offensive stuff but also for being to “chatty” on it.
One place I worked, we worked flexy hours, and only a 35 hour week which was great. But your hours were checked, when you had a break you had to clock off, that included smokers clocking off every time they went out for a cigarette.
I was in the IT department so had a bit more flexibility, but the office staff who were dealing with the day to day operation of the business, would be monitored on how much work they did and when they got a piece of work the clock for processing it would start automatically, they had to meet targets and if they didn’t they would be in a meeting with their line manager.
Of course this doesn’t mean I agree with driver facing cameras in cabs, but don’t think other workers get it easy when comes to monitoring at work, specially in large companies.
The problem is about to hit full circle. People have been paying peanuts for so long, the insurance companies are growing tired of paying for the damage the monkeys cause. Almost every day there’s a new thread on here where a vehicle has suffered major damage due to driver negligence. And there’s normally a dozen more that don’t make it here too. I don’t like the idea of them, and I certainly wouldn’t be having a night out in a truck that’s got one fitted. And the wages would have to be bloody good if it was a day job too
The face forward camera like many have said is something you soon forget and I don’t mind them.
Facing the driver one is a no…no I’m afraid.
Where I work they have just limited all the new trucks (mercs) 81km.
I’m paid by the hour but when I start at midnight doing a trunk to Preston from Northampton I must admit I sat at 88km then used the extra for overtake…now as I sit at 50ish I find it shutting my eyes by time I make it to Crewe area.
I dont believe a company is going to spend thousands of pounds on spying equipment, for the drivers benefit, its a spy in the cab, to see what the driver gets up to, if hes smoking for example, eating while driving etc etc…forward facing cameras are a great idea…in todays current climate so i welcome the bosses paying for them instead of coming out of our own pocket, now that is in the drivers interest, if i went to a company who had cab/driver cameras fitted, i would simply tell them why i`m walking out of the gate, same as if i was working for a company who were contemplating fitting them. If a company has money to spend on this technology, tell them to fit cameras to watch the sides of the curtains, the rear doors, and the fuel tank, we need this equipment to protect us, not to spy on us.
