It is not a choice Rog, it is an application of some written text that we are required to abide. Now you may be right, but this is not plain English and they should put more effort into it,if not simplify the rules then the wording so it can be easily understood. Truck drivers cannot be expected to be in touch with legal wording. I would contest with any punishment for the above simply because it is not clear enough.
Boris1971:
Going back to plain English why use it it one part of the rules, hours eg 90 hours in any two week period, but not in another part of the same document unless it has a different meaning.
I think you’re reading two different documents, VOSAs guide uses the words “any two week period” but the regulaitons (EC) 561/2006 uses the words “The total accumulated driving time during any two consecutive weeks shall not exceed 90 hours”.
GV262 which is VOSAs guide interprets the regulations and tries to put them in a way people can easily understand, that document, as good as it is, doesn’t always use the exact words of the regulations.
Boris1971:
It is not a choice Rog, it is an application of some written text that we are required to abide. Now you may be right, but this is not plain English and they should put more effort into it,if not simplify the rules then the wording so it can be easily understood. Truck drivers cannot be expected to be in touch with legal wording. I would contest with any punishment for the above simply because it is not clear enough.
I cannot make you think a different way so suggest you try it your way and see what happens which is unfortunate as it means you will be getting infringements and none of us trying to help you wanted that
Boris1971:
It is not a choice Rog, it is an application of some written text that we are required to abide. Now you may be right, but this is not plain English and they should put more effort into it,if not simplify the rules then the wording so it can be easily understood. Truck drivers cannot be expected to be in touch with legal wording. I would contest with any punishment for the above simply because it is not clear enough.
Sorry mate but it’s very clear, “any two consecutive weeks” has only one meaning, and that is two weeks that directly follow each other.
Well you have probably convinced me,thanks for you input. But I still believe if you read that with fresh eyes not knowing what you already know you it could easily be misunderstood.
Boris1971:
I still believe
Anyone is entitled to believe what they like but misinterpreting or not fully understanding is something else
Boris1971:
Well you have probably convinced me,thanks for you input. But I still believe if you read that with fresh eyes not knowing what you already know you it could easily be misunderstood.
Unfortunately a whole load of regulations that we have to abide by can very easily be taken out of context or misinterpreted with potentially serious financial consequences. I do agree with you Boris that a lot is at best ambiguous, and it seems to me that bits and bobs were “bolted on” to the regs as they evolved.