ROG:
I was not there so cannot say how the rep presented his case on the day
What I can see is that there is a SECTION of the regs that are rules for DRIVERS
I can see that the there is a SECTION of the regs AFTER the rules for DRIVERS that is titled LIABILITY OF TRANSPORT UNDERTAKINGS
I am going to GUESS that the rep referred to the SECTION that refers to DRIVERS along with article 1 which refers to road safety as the dismissed driver stated possible tiredness as an issue
Again, I’m GUESSING that referring to the ‘DRIVER REGS’ and metioning 561 was referring to that SECTION for drivers
It could be said that 561 as a WHOLE is the regs for the INDUSTRY as it encompasses drivers and those directly involved in that industry
Is this was you were getting at ?
Five paragraphs condensed to one smiley conveying the same message. Why didn’t I think of that?
You don’t have a smiley blowing a trumpet I could use for ROG in the future do you?
ROG:
I was not there so cannot say how the rep presented his case on the day
What I can see is that there is a SECTION of the regs that are rules for DRIVERS
I can see that the there is a SECTION of the regs AFTER the rules for DRIVERS that is titled LIABILITY OF TRANSPORT UNDERTAKINGS
I am going to GUESS that the rep referred to the SECTION that refers to DRIVERS along with article 1 which refers to road safety as the dismissed driver stated possible tiredness as an issue
Again, I’m GUESSING that referring to the ‘DRIVER REGS’ and metioning 561 was referring to that SECTION for drivers
It could be said that 561 as a WHOLE is the regs for the INDUSTRY as it encompasses drivers and those directly involved in that industry
Is this was you were getting at ?
Five paragraphs condensed to one smiley conveying the same message. Why didn’t I think of that?
You don’t have a smiley blowing a trumpet I could use for ROG in the future do you?
Coffeeholic:
So your adamant assertion that there are different rules for drivers and ‘the industry’ earlier in the thread was just based on guessing and your limited knowledge of the rules?
Article 1
This Regulation lays down rules on driving times, breaks and
rest periods for drivers engaged in the carriage of goods and
passengers by road in order to harmonise the conditions of
competition between modes of inland transport, especially
with regard to the road sector, and to improve working
conditions and road safety. This Regulation also aims to
promote improved monitoring and enforcement practices by
Member States and improved working practices in the road
transport industry.
Either I am reading this wrong or it says that this regulation is in two parts - one for drivers and one for the practices in the industry
Coffeeholic:
So your adamant assertion that there are different rules for drivers and ‘the industry’ earlier in the thread was just based on guessing and your limited knowledge of the rules?
Article 1
This Regulation lays down rules on driving times, breaks and
rest periods for drivers engaged in the carriage of goods and
passengers by road in order to harmonise the conditions of
competition between modes of inland transport, especially
with regard to the road sector, and to improve working
conditions and road safety. This Regulation also aims to
promote improved monitoring and enforcement practices by
Member States and improved working practices in the road
transport industry.
Either I am reading this wrong or it says that this regulation is in two parts - one for drivers and one for the practices in the industry
You are reading it wrong. The blue bit is for drivers and operators/transport organisations and the red bit includes enforcement authorities such as VOSA, BAG and so on.
The blue bit includes all the answers to that question you keep ignoring, in particular the bit about competition. Why would the bit about competition only be for drivers, that is very obviously aimed at companies and operators.
Anyway, regardless of how many parts the regulation is in it is still one regulation, you said it your self when you said this regulation,regulation in the singular not plural, so does destroy your stance earlier in the thread where you were trying to claim there were two sets of regulations, drivers regulations and industry regulations, does it not?
Coffeeholic:
Anyway, regardless of how many parts the regulation is in it is still one regulation, you said it your self when you said this regulation,regulation in the singular not plural, so does destroy your stance earlier in the thread where you were trying to claim there were two sets of regulations, drivers regulations and industry regulations, does it not?
It does
Deffo one regulation with sections of it having specific rules for particular sections of this industry
Coffeeholic:
Anyway, regardless of how many parts the regulation is in it is still one regulation, you said it your self when you said this regulation,regulation in the singular not plural, so does destroy your stance earlier in the thread where you were trying to claim there were two sets of regulations, drivers regulations and industry regulations, does it not?
It does
Deffo one regulation with sections of it having specific rules for particular sections of this industry
But the blue part in your previous post still isn’t only for drivers any-more than chapter 2 is
All those are under the Liability of transport undertakings section
And now for ROG’s results after his specialist subject round.
Strictly speaking, your blanket answer is incorrect due to your use of the word “all” - but I’ll be generous and split it up to allow you to count it as a crack at each question separately. At least you score one point that way.
Article 10 = you answered correctly.
Article 11 = A Member State, so your answer was incorrect.
(“Chapter IV” and “Exceptions” written just above Article 11 were clues that you were no longer looking at “Undertakings.” )
Article 13 = A Member State, so your answer was incorrect.
Article 22 = A Member State, so your answer was incorrect.
Article 25 = The Commission, so your answer was incorrect.
So ROG, having attempted five questions, your score is: 1 correct answer and four trumpets
I forgot to tell you the title of this show, it’s: Trumpeter of the year, and you’ve won with a record score.
I now share Neil’s concern that you don’t actually read the Regs, because the answers to the questions were glaringly obvious to anybody who actually looks at 561/2006. Sorry mate, but your blanket answer really didn’t do you any favours.
ROG:
DD - the answer was deliberately done like to provoke a reaction - where is that fishing hook
Bullcrap!! You were not fishing for a reaction. You thought you had found a definitive answer and when you got shot down in flames you were not big enough to admit it and see your error*, you still aren’t with a crap attempt at claiming a fishing expedition. The only fish related thing is you doing a very good impression of a flounder**.
*Which has always been your modus operandi on here.
**Ironically also know as a Fluke which is usually how you get tacho related questions correct.
After many years discussion and part agreement and disagreements the MEMBER STATES decided thus;
(17) This Regulation aims to improve social conditions for
employees who are covered by it, as well as to improve
general road safety. It does so mainly by means of the
provisions pertaining to maximum driving times per day,
per week and per period of two consecutive weeks, the
provision which obliges drivers to take a regular weekly
rest period at least once per two consecutive weeks and
the provisions which prescribe that under no circumstances
should a daily rest period be less than an
uninterrupted period of nine hours. Since those provisions
guarantee adequate rest, and also taking into
account experience with enforcement practices during
the past years, a system of compensation for reduced
daily rest periods is no longer necessary.
As an aside I also think Article 10 in it’s entirety is an important section to read and digest. The whole regulation is not too difficult to understand but you must read what is writ and not what is not!
ROG:
DD - the answer was deliberately done like to provoke a reaction - where is that fishing hook
Bullcrap!! You were not fishing for a reaction. You thought you had found a definitive answer and when you got shot down in flames you were not big enough to admit it and see your error*, you still aren’t with a crap attempt at claiming a fishing expedition. The only fish related thing is you doing a very good impression of a flounder**.
*Which has always been your modus operandi on here.
**Ironically also know as a Fluke which is usually how you get tacho related questions correct.
This Thread Is Worthless Without One Of Those American ‘Pwned’ Images.
Wheel Nut:
After many years discussion and part agreement and disagreements the MEMBER STATES decided thus;
(17) This Regulation aims to improve social conditions for
employees who are covered by it, as well as to improve
general road safety. It does so mainly by means of the
provisions pertaining to maximum driving times per day,
per week and per period of two consecutive weeks, the
provision which obliges drivers to take a regular weekly
rest period at least once per two consecutive weeks and
the provisions which prescribe that under no circumstances
should a daily rest period be less than an
uninterrupted period of nine hours. Since those provisions
guarantee adequate rest, and also taking into
account experience with enforcement practices during
the past years, a system of compensation for reduced
daily rest periods is no longer necessary.
Re the bit in blue -
What are the definitions of adequate rest for each type of situation ?
Wheel Nut:
After many years discussion and part agreement and disagreements the MEMBER STATES decided thus;
(17) This Regulation aims to improve social conditions for
employees who are covered by it, as well as to improve
general road safety. It does so mainly by means of the
provisions pertaining to maximum driving times per day,
per week and per period of two consecutive weeks, the
provision which obliges drivers to take a regular weekly
rest period at least once per two consecutive weeks and
the provisions which prescribe that under no circumstances
should a daily rest period be less than an
uninterrupted period of nine hours. Since those provisions
guarantee adequate rest, and also taking into
account experience with enforcement practices during
the past years, a system of compensation for reduced
daily rest periods is no longer necessary.
Re the bit in blue -
What are the definitions of adequate rest for each type of situation ?
Nine hours and 24 hours. It says as much in the bit above the blue bit. I used to joke that you never actually read anything but it appears it isn’t a joke and is true.
Those are the regulations - I asked for a DEFINITION of what is adequate rest for an individual in a particular situation - where is that in the regulations ?
ROG:
Those are the regulations - I asked for a DEFINITION of what is adequate rest for an individual in a particular situation - where is that in the regulations ?
How can you regulate for every person in every conceivable situation
A question for you ROG:
How would you define what is adequate rest for any individual in every conceivable situation ?
Instead of asking questions that are as far as I can see impossible to answer, tell us your opinion on how the regulations should define what is adequate rest for any individual in any given situation.
Indeed they are, so when the regulations say the provisions provide adequate rest that therefore means the rest requirements laid down by the regulations are deemed to be adequate.
ROG:
I asked for a DEFINITION of what is adequate rest for an individual in a particular situation - where is that in the regulations?
You asked for the definitions of adequate rest, you didn’t mention individuals, but no matter because the regulations do apply to any individual working under them, and 9 hours is regarded as adequate for daily rest 3 times between weekly rest periods otherwise 11 hours rest is regarded as adequate. Weekly the definition of adequate rest as covered by that quote is 24 or 45 hours. Driving limits must also be taken into consideration because by limiting driving it limits tiredness.
Where is it in the regulations? Look at the sections that cover daily and weekly rest and the various driving limits and you will find them.
You are doing it again, not reading what is there and trying to read what isn’t. Why not for a change try just actually reading and understanding what is in the regulations instead of skimming them and then coming out with bizarre crap that anyone with an ounce of common sense can see is impossible for the regulations to cover
Obviously the regulations have to cover a broad spectrum and cannot be written to cover every individual in countless situations. What it says in that quote is that the people who devised those regulations regard the various limits they have imposed as providing adequate rest for all.
If however an individual feels those limits do not provide adequate rest then maybe this isn’t the industry for them because like it or not those are the regulations and constantly claiming tiredness when working to those regulations would strongly suggest this isn’t the job for them. In much the same way as you decided night work wasn’t for you and have said so many times on here. Which brings us nicely full circle back to the original question. Is it solely up to the driver to reduce? Answer; No, the regulations accept 9 hour daily rest periods and the operators have a duty to abide by the regulations and can therefore make use of the 9 hour rest periods when scheduling the work.
At least you score one point that way. 
