This report describes the results of a national survey of
transport companies in Australia. The aim was to survey companies
about knowledge and awareness of fatigue, about workrest scheduling
practices and about the factors which underlie the way schedules
are organised. The survey was designed to provide complimentary
information to that obtained in a national survey of drivers
undertaken at the same time, and reported elsewhere. Telephone
interviews with 200 companies carrying freight over distances
greater than 300km were undertaken, covering all regulated mainland
states of Australia, and the Northern Territory. Companies were
selected randomly from the telephone directory. The Northern
Territory was included because it provided a comparison with an
unregulated state. A middle management staff member, familiar with
line haul operations was interviewed from each company. This report
presents the main descriptive data obtained in the survey and
provides an overview of views, knowledge and practices with respect
to fatigue management. Key comparisons were drawn with the data
obtained from the driver survey undertaken at the same time.
One of the key findings of this report was that there is a lag
between increased awareness of fatigue and changes in operational
practice. The majority of companies reported that awareness of
fatigue had increased, both for themselves and their company, as
well as for the industry at large over the last 5 years. However,
from the results it seems that this increased awareness does not
guarantee better management of the problem. Only half of the
companies surveyed reported that they believed that fatigue was
well managed in the industry and one fifth reported that it is
badly managed. Even so, this is more optimistic compared with the
verdict of drivers, half of whom reported that fatigue is badly
managed in the industry.
Further evidence of the lag between increased awareness about
fatigue in general and companies actually coming to grips with
better management of the problem came from views of causes of and
strategies to manage fatigue. Virtually all companies endorsed the
significance of sleep and recovery before and during trips, and the
contribution of long hours. However, other key contributors to
fatigue were grossly underestimated. Company representatives failed
to report the significance of night work as a prime contributor to
fatigue and consolidated night sleep as prime strategy for reducing
fatigue. Similarly, there was lack of recognition by companies of
the substantial contribution of non-driving work, particularly
loading and unloading, to the overall burden on drivers, and
accordingly lack of endorsement of limits for such work as a
fatigue management strategy. This picture is in sharp contrast to
that presented by drivers, where awareness of the key contributors
and likely effective strategies was much more in line with current
knowledge.
It is hardly surprising that fatigue has become a more prominent
feature of companies risk management agenda. There have been a
number of high profile initiatives in safety promotions and
legislative directions over the last decade all aiming to focus
industry attention on better management of driver fatigue. The
results of the survey highlight that increased awareness does not
immediately translate into increased knowledge and operational
changes.
This systemic inertia was also evident in the persistence of
industry perceptions that the freight task needs to be maximally
responsive to the demands of customers and freight forwarders,
often described as the chain of responsibility. In fact, the
picture presented by the companies themselves was rather different.
The majority of companies reported that they have considerable
control over schedules, with only a minority reporting that their
work was mostly irregular. Strict estimated times of arrival were
uncommon and trip times were mostly based on company and driver
estimates, according to the companies surveyed. In other words,
companies appear to have potential for far greater control over
their schedules than is recognised or exercised.
The study provided some evidence that better attitudes to
fatigue were associated with company practices that were more
likely to manage fatigue effectively. For example, more aware
companies were more likely to monitor fatigue and were more likely
to change their schedules to accommodate driver fatigue. In
contrast, companies who relied on the industry in general for
management of fatigue and/or in the working hours regulations were
less likely to be paying attention to the problem, were less likely
to monitor fatigue and were more likely to change schedules to suit
customer demands rather than for driver fatigue. They also used
fewer management strategies and were less likely to otherwise
restrict hours. These findings suggest that while attitudes do not
seem to have a dramatic effect on practice, education and
information for companies is a useful strategy for actively
involving companies in better management of fatigue and for
overcoming complacency about the driver fatigue problem.
Fatigue management strategies reported by companies surveyed
focused on limitations of daily and weekly hours of service. Not
surprisingly, there was less intervention and active management of
fatigue for non-employee drivers. Active fatigue management
strategies, monitoring of fatigue, or even formal policies for
fatigue management for sub-contractor and independent drivers were
reported by only a small minority of companies. Yet half of the
companies surveyed reported that they hire these types of drivers.
In many cases fatigue management for non-employee drivers is likely
to become, by default, the responsibility of the individual driver.
This is a serious problem because effective fatigue management is
unlikely to emerge without not only company co-operation, but also
active and formal company collaboration.
Surprisingly few differences were evident between companies of
different sizes. Obvious and predictable structural differences
were reported, for example greater reliance of smaller companies on
non-employee drivers. Also predictably, formal policies and
technical monitoring approaches were less common, reflecting the
resource intensive nature of these strategies. However, little
impact was seen of company size on the attitudes to fatigue and
scheduling practices reported by companies surveyed. This pattern
of findings suggests that the translation of fatigue awareness into
operational practices is universally slow, and is not just a
feature of some segments of the industry having reduced access to
information and so forth.
Overall, this survey suggests that there is considerable scope
for improving understanding and management of fatigue in the
industry. Companies do not seem to be doing all that could be done
to improve management of fatigue. Partly, this seems to reflect a
lack of understanding about the phenomenon. There was poor
understanding among line haul managers of how driver fatigue
develops, the key role played by time of day and the contribution
of total burden of work, not just driving. There needs to be
greater
understanding in the industry that the problem requires a more
sophisticated approach than simply restricting hours of driving.
Education and information for companies is likely to be a useful
strategy to alert companies to the most appropriate practices and
to overcome complacency about the problem. The survey revealed that
approaches affecting global attitudes, general increases in
awareness and so forth, have had little impact on practices. On the
other hand, they are likely to have been important for raising the
profile of the problem in the industry and laying the groundwork
for more targeted information and education. Indeed, it is hard to
imagine how transport operators could develop the most effective
interventions for their particular freight task, as demanded by
Fatigue Management Programs, without being better informed. From
the results of this survey, improved understanding of fatigue and
its characteristics among transport managers must be seen as an
immediate priority.