• The vast majority of Britain's truck drivers accept random
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
drug and drink testing, according to a CM survey at one of Southern England's busiest truckstops.
Random testing of HGV drivers became mandatory in the United States earlier this year and UK petrochemical companie. are following suit, with Texaco becoming the latest firm to insist that its transport operation, run by Wincanton, adopts the practice.
Esso has randomly tested its 250 drivers since 1989 and Linkman Tankers is about to discuss a scheme with staff, despite being embroiled in a dispute over wage cuts.
The Transport & General Workers Union stresses that it wants to remain "vigilant" over the civil rights aspect of the issue. It has co-operated with the introduction of schemes in the oil industry, believing that its driver members have a professional attitude to safety. But the drink testing may not be limited to tanker firms.
London laboratory JSPS specialises in analysing urine and blood samples for drugs, and director Ian Dick is convinced general haulage companies will opt for testing before long. He believes that Europe is being flooded with cheaper drugs which drivers could be tempted to use and already has several transport companies among his clients.
BAD IMAGE
Drivers interviewed by CM did not recognise drug taking as a problem within the UK industry, but were extremely concerned at the bad image given to truckers by any incidents of drink/driving. An overwhelming 82% came down firmly in favour of random drug and drink testing if their company chose to introduce it: 12% claimed to be teetotal.
Objectors to random testing were unhappy that their social life might be eaten into by company regulations and felt that the police had sufficient powers to deal with the few who might drive while incapable through drink or drugs.
Alan Thomas, who drives for the Bank of England, is not opposed to random testing: "You've got 38 tonnes behind you — a guy on the M4 recently turned over his truck when he was drunk and killed three people," he says.
"It sounds fair enough to me," says Phil Roundshaw, a general haulage contract driver for Samsons, through his employer Kings Haulage of Northampton. "It's a sackable offence in my firm to be under the influence of drink or drugs — and random testing would promote road safety."
Neville Brinkhurst, driving for P&O Containers, disagrees with drugs "on principle" and is vehemently opposed to drinking and driving. Mark Davies, transporting garden sheds for S Wernick based in Brownhills, West Midlands, told CM that 44 random testing of truckers would make the roads "safer for the general public". Chris Ledwidge, stopping for a break on the way down from Huddersfield where he drives for Tom Moorehouse & Sons, recognised the dangers of social drinking when there is driving to be done next day: "If somebody has too much the night before they are a danger to themselves and the public," he says.
This view was echoed by Anthony Butcher, leaning out of the cab of his Mercedes 2033 38-tonner filled with office furniture for drops in Enfield and Hertfordshire. Butcher works for Sussex haulier .JJ Adam: "If I was driving on a Monday morning," he says. "I wouldn't drink on a Sunday night."
A voice of dissent came from Steven Cobley, driving on general haulage for Denby of Lincoln: "The police already have the power to stop drivers, so random testing by employers is unnecessary — however, I certainly would not drink and drive because you'd lose your job and jobs are hard to come by."
One driver who did not want to be named saw random testing as "very much an infringement of civil liberties .. the police already have that job and do it perfectly well."
Some drivers were keen to participate in any scheme that would improve the image of the industry in the eyes of the public. Alan Rose stepped down from his Clancy Plant hire low-loader, declaring firmly: "I've got nothing to hide and no objection to testing — if anything it improves the image of lorry drivers, it's got to be a good thing. Lorry drivers have got a terrible image; unfortunately many have got themselves to blame."
Michael Teasdale, down from Clarks Removers in Blackpool, had similar concerns: "Testing would protect the company, the vehicle, other road users and boost the industry's image," he argues. Ryder Distribution's Mark Broxton had little sympathy for drivers who fall foul of any testing scheme; "Anyone who drinks and drives is an idiot," he says.
There were few owner-drivers in the sample, but one, Charles Harris of Chelmsford, took a more relaxed view: "It's okay for drivers to have a pint in the evening but I don't drink anyway — I can find better things to do with my money."
The same applied to Stuart Allen, driving a 7.5-tonner for Total Plant from Milton Keynes to Harlow. 'I don't mind — I don't drink at all," he says.
The minority who had doubts about employer-led testing schemes identified the fact that a driver can still have traces of alcohol from the night before while still being well within the legal limit to drive. Could this count as a disciplinary offence or evidence that a driver was unfit?
And would legal, prescribed drugs cause unreasonable questions to be asked? Some drivers held the view that random testing might be justified for those employed in carrying hazardous goods and chemicals, but said that it had no place in general haulage.
In America, where drug usage among drivers is believed to be widespread, random testing has led to few being caught. The law calls for half of a firm's drivers to be tested yearly and owner-drivers are obliged to form pools for the purpose of random testing. But out of 143,000 tests only 2% have proved positive.
If the attitude of most of the drivers CM spoke to is reflected across the industry the percentage failing random drink/drug tests in the UK ought to be negligible — begging the question, is it really necessary, or is it another fop to keep insurance companies happy?
0 by Patric tunnane