Driver CPC doesn't Look out for our needs...
Page 20
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
YOUR EDITORIAL (CM 17 June) ends with the view that if Driver CPC is properly regulated, it is not red tape, it is a huge opportunity".
Well, let me tell you, if it's tacky and it's red, then it's probably red tape. And Driver CPC is definitely tacky and red. And it has EU printed along one side, which probably stands for enormously unhelpful, rather than huge opportunity.
Driver CPC legislation is based on the premise that every driver needs five days training every five years. We don't know what that the training consists of and it could be needed anytime between now and 2014, but we definitely know it's five days and it's definitely in the next live years. How does that make any sense? Driver training needs to recognise the needs of the individual. Some drivers need very little training and some need a lot.
Like all red tape this particular red tape is designed to increase the burden on the compliant employer and offer several large loopholes for the less responsible employer to escape through. Responsible companies like ours already provide training over and above the statutory requirement* but it is not recognised for Driver CPC. It's very good training and its relevant to our business It is delivered in the right quantity, at the right time and in the right context.
As a truck operator, I can tell you that Driver CPC is a hindrance to that process, rather than an aid.
Peter Lanier Managing director Suckling Transport Editor's note: Peter, thanks for the letter. We understand your point of view. What we want out of Driver CPC is precisely what your training is already delivering to your firm: flexibility and the choke to provide the right training at the right time, matching both the company's and driver's needs. With a more robust administrative framework, the loopholes through which rogue operators can slip would be closed down.
DRIVER
CPC
,&& MAKE IT
WORK!