Why have only a few organisations…

• undertaken a comprehensive health & safety assessment to minimise occupational road risk – even though health and safety legislation requires it?
• put occupational road risk issues on the board agenda – even though board members themselves may be personally liable?
• have a road risk reduction programme - even though their staff are at risk every day and the existing costs are often substantial?

There are clearly main reasons – laissez faire attitude, road risk is only one of many business risks, unsure where to start, don’t see a financial benefit etc. However organisations, that don’t act, are not only potentially gambling with the lives of their staff and therefore failing to provide appropriate ‘duty of care’ but they have missed an opportunity to reduce vehicle costs and reputational risk within their business.

At AA DriveTech, we believe there are many compelling business arguments…

• ‘duty of care’ & legal
• moral & social responsibility
• economic savings
• reputation & ‘best practice’

… why all companies should implement an occupational road risk management strategy.

Under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 employers have a statutory duty - they are required – ‘ to carry out an assessment of the risks to the health and safety of their employees ’ and that ‘includes any driving activity on the road’ – see http://www.hse.gov.uk/roadsafety/employers.htm

Some businesses have opted out of offering the traditional company car to employees believing that moving to a cash-for-car, personal contract purchase scheme or employee car ownership scheme removes their health and safety responsibilities. It doesn’t.

> Fact 1: Magazine giant IPC has removed its cash for car choice for high mileage drivers, citing fears that accidents involving badly maintained cars could leave the company open to corporate manslaughter charges.

> Fact 2: A firm faced a £9 million damages bill after one of its drivers ran over a cyclist while using a mobile phone. The cyclist was left paralysed from the neck down and on a life support machine. The £9 million payout is thought to be the highest awarded to a British citizen by an English court.

Case study ~ BSkyB “We are a high-profile organisation and it is imperative that we have in place, and actively pursue, measures to reduce the potential for injury and fatalities among our driving employees. Occupational driving has been highlighted as a key risk area across the media industry”.

Driving is, without doubt, the most dangerous work-related activity performed by most people in Britain.

It is estimated that a third (33%) of these - 1,000 road deaths and 13,000 serious injuries a year - involve people driving for work. Indeed, RoSPA calculates that, after deep sea fishing and coal mining, driving 25,000 miles a year on business is the most life-threatening activity we undertake - more dangerous than working in construction.

With as many deaths and serious injuries involving people who were at work at the time, the moral argument demanding that companies take measures to safeguard the lives of their staff and other road users, is compelling.

> Fact 1: The number of road deaths in Britain is the equivalent on one World Trade Towers ‘9/11’ tragedy occurring every year.

> Fact 2: Driving is the most dangerous task the majority of employees undertake while at work. In fact, four times as many people are killed while driving for work than any other industrial accident.

Case study ~ Miele: “We have a strong moral responsibility to make sure our employees are working in the safest possible environment. The financial bonus we received in the form of a premium reduction, coupled with the reduced number of accidents have been two of the benefits of our commitment to driver training.”

On average, 65% of all company vehicles will be involved in a road incidence within the next 12 months and that average vehicle repair costs, following an accident, can range between £750 and £4,500 per claim.

The savings attributable to a risk management programme

• A reduction in insurance premiums of at least 15% depending on previous claims record, fleet size and composition at a time when insurance premiums are escalating at the rate of 20-30% annually.
• Fuel consumption improvements of at least 7%
• Reductions of at least 5% in wear and tear on tyres, brakes and clutches etc.
• Improved vehicle value of a minimum of 4% if a trained driver drives the car.

• Fewer accidents
• Less need for investigation
• Less administration
• Less lost time
• Less requirement for work rescheduling
• Lower training costs
• Fewer missed orders/sales opportunities
• Improved staff morale
• Improved public image
• Protection from prosecution

> Fact 1: Driver training can typically reduce fleet costs by up to 20% in the first year.

> Fact 2: Fleet costs hit the bottom line. For example, a company with a turnover of £ 10M with 4% return on sales, a fleet of 40 vehicles with typical incident rates and costs of repair and admin, needs to generate around £ 990,000 in revenue simply to cover the full costs of road traffic accidents alone.

Case study ~ Red Bull: “A targeted driver training programme has been introduced to improve the safety of our drivers and reduce accident costs. We have had a reduction in accidents year-on-year and that has resulted in insurance premium savings.”

The feedback from many fleet managers is that they ‘get it’ but that their bosses don’t see it as high priority. So what are the potential consequences for the business as a whole?

Today, the police treat the scene of a fatal road collision as an ‘unlawful killing’ and, if appropriate, may interview the employee, managers and directors. Under today’s legislation, if the company’s actions – or lack of them – is deemed to have contributed to the incident, company representatives may be charged with manslaughter.

As well as the personal risk and stress, the reputation of the company as a whole may be threatened. In today’s marketplace, ‘brand value’ can be a major competitive advantage and unlawful actions by an employee, both deliberate and accidental, can significantly affect this corporate asset.

Case Study ~ Direct Communications: “‘We have suffered at least one vehicle write-off a year and a number of other incidents involving our vehicles which causes significant upheaval to our business, can impact on our customers, causes distress to our employees and other road users and hits the company financially. Since introducing a safe driving training programme, our drivers have not been involved in any road traffic incidents”

Driving in general and driving ‘at work’ in particular is a high-risk activity and the costs, when it all goes wrong, can be substantial. ‘Doing nothing’ is not a rational business decision as the business-wide benefits of assessing road risk, measuring it & then managing it, cannot be ignored.