Crossing The Border: Canada
Will carriers and owner-operators heed the mandatory speed limiter call?
Jim Park
Contributing Editor
Jaws were dropping all across the land this past July when the Ontario Trucking Assn. – the largest trucking association in Canada and the third largest in North America – put out a call for mandatory speed-limiting devices on trucks.
Perhaps only slightly more surprising was OTA's call for continent-wide adoption of the policy.
In a statement, OTA indicated that while a North American-wide approach to mandating speed limiters would be optimal, it was prepared to "urge the Ontario government to ensure that at least all the trucks that operate into, out of, and within this province are speed limited."
OTA president David Bradley says this issue has been a topic of discussion around OTA boardroom for some time. It's nothing new, he notes, adding, "In addition to the specific issue of speeding, it is felt that speed is correlated with poor lane discipline, which we are also trying to begin to address."
Several members of the OTA board recently visited a number of European states including the United Kingdom, Belgium, Germany and France on a fact-finding mission, concluding that speeding and lane discipline were not big issues over there.
"The use of mandatory speed limiters works. A speeding truck would stick out like a sore thumb in Europe," says Mark Seymour, CEO of Kriska Transportation in Prescott, Ont. "In the several hundred kilometers we drove over there, I never once saw a speeding truck. In my view, poor lane discipline is a by-product of speeding. In Europe, trucks stick to the inside lane for the most part. It was great to see."
Whether or not that policy can, or should, be adopted in North America is another issue. Critics of the OTA plan are quick to point out that trucks spec'd for efficient operation at higher speeds would take quite a hit being forced to operate at reduced speeds. Drivers, predictably, aren't very receptive to the idea, nor are owner-ops. That group is becoming quite vociferous in it's opposition.
Joanne Ritchie, executive director of the Owner-Operator's Business Assn. of Canada (OBAC), says she's been getting calls from members saying they're prepared to hang up their keys if the plan goes through.
"Who could argue against eliminating speeding trucks?" Ritchie asks. "But rather than looking to government to mandate speed limiters, carriers should be taking the initiative internally to manage truck speed for safety and fuel efficiency – that's what we're encouraging our members to do."
OBAC has a number of educational initiatives under way explaining and demonstrating the value of economizing and maximizing the potential for profit by reducing costs.
"I'm all for a level playing field, especially if it means lowering fuel and truck prices for single truck owners and small fleets; economies of scale enjoyed by the large carriers already give them a competitive advantage," says Ritchie. "As an industry, we should be urging the authorities to focus on enforcement of safe driving practices and public education, not to meddle in the marketplace."
And in a roundabout way, that is part of the OTA agenda.
In the original statement, Bradley referred to a leveling of the playing field as one of the reasons his association was proposing mandatory speed limiters.
"All players in the industry should be competing, pricing their service, establishing delivery schedules and meeting customer demands on a level playing field where everyone is playing by the rules and without pressure to operate beyond the rules," the statement said.
At least part of the hoped-for level-playing field includes recruiting issues. Bradley has admitted that several of his members with speed policies have lost drivers to fleets that do not have in-house road-speed policies.
"A number of carriers who are already operating with speed limiters have told us they have lost drivers to companies that will allow them to speed, or have felt pressured to increase the maximum speed of their fleet in order to keep some of their drivers – particularly owner-operators – happy," he notes. "So, yes, this is an issue. However, I can tell you that it has not been the over-riding concern. Fuel efficiency is probably a more important consideration."
COST FACTORS
To be sure, speed drives up cost. And shippers are noticing. Peter McLaren is traffic manager at a northern Ontario lumber mill that cleans and dresses softwood for eventual export to the U.S. He ships to distribution centers in southern Ontario for transshipment south.
"I'm getting surcharged 15% to 20% of the freight bill. On my way home from work, the truck I loaded an hour earlier blows by me like I'm up sitting still," he says. "I've got a small problem paying that kind of a surcharge when the guys burning the stuff obviously don't value the benefit of the surcharge."
Of course tires, drivelines and tractor life-cycle costing are all impacted by speed, but just what constitutes speeding? Ontario's major highways have speed limits of 100 km/h (62 mph). Secondary highways are posted at 80 km/h (50 mph). The provinces of Alberta and New Brunswick have posted limits of 110 km/h (66 mph) on main arteries, while Nevada, New Mexico and seven other states have limits of 75 mph. Trying to achieve consensus on this one would be a monumental task, to say the least.
Ontario's solution? Bradley says he is prepared to urge the Ontario government to go it alone.
That, Bradley says, would require speed limiters on all trucks operating in the province, including outside carriers servicing or transiting the province. That would require some verifiable means of establishing that trucks had an active speed limiter, and it was engaged. So, how would Ontario verify the presence of an active speed limiter on a truck?
"Actually, it does not appear to be all that difficult," Bradley asserts. "Handheld PDA's are already being used that can tell you immediately what speed a truck limiter is set at. There may have to be some modification in terms of who has access to which codes to avoid tampering, but this does not seem to be technically insurmountable."
While Bradley wasn't able to go into a lot more detail, one can see roadside inspections in the province including a speed-limiter verification where the enforcement officer would plug a PDA into the reader port to check the codes on the ECM.
That, according to Merlyn Jay, is going a bit too far. Jay is an independent owner-operator based in Charlottetown, PEI, who insists no one will get anywhere near his truck with a reader of any kind unless it's to repair the thing. "I run the truck at a reasonable speed because my business depends on how I drive the truck. If they want strict speed limits, they could start with cars, and they could enforce the existing limits better than they do now."
Currently in Ontario, the unwritten, unofficial speed limit has crept up to 120 km/h (72 mph), meaning that unless you're doing something else to draw attention to yourself, probably no one will even look sideways at you.
Rodney Orr, a senior company driver with one of the largest truckload firms in Canada thinks it's an idea whose time has come. "The government has a responsibility to protect the public. Our laws must reflect this responsibility. If it means restricting the speed of vehicles; then so be it. If it means stricter enforcement of the current rules and regulations; then so be that, too," he says. "It is nice to see a proactive approach to the issues identified in Mr. Bradley's report."
Bradley says his members would likely agree that more vigorous enforcement could be an alternative. "But, the fact of the matter is, there is little police enforcement of truck speed on the major highways, now, and frankly little if any prospect of that changing," he suggests.
For their part, it has been said that due to the substandard nature of the highways in the province – and in most of Canada, for that matter – police see pulling trucks over on the highways as a safety hazard. There are no shoulders to speak of on many of Ontario's secondary highways, and the four-lane 400-series roadways have soft gravel shoulders that could pose a roll-over threat.
Increased enforcement would likely have unwanted consequences for carriers, anyway. Speeding violations are recorded on a carrier's operating profile and demerit points are recorded for each infraction. Stepped up enforcement could result in degradations to some carriers' safety ratings.
"The transportation industry has a very powerful voice, let's use it. We should demand enforcement," says Orr. "Will this happen? No. The OTA will be hard pressed to convince members to support an initiative that will affect their safety rating or their pocketbooks. It will be easier to restrict the speed vehicles by mechanical (electronic) means, than through human intervention."
The plan has support from a majority of member carriers, including most backbenchers. But other truckers in the province – from owner-operators to larger firms – wasted little time in expressing their displeasure with the idea.
One opponent is Martin Paddock of Stoney Creek, Ont.-based Packers Logistics – a 50-truck food hauler. "This is a perfect example of why I won't participate in [OTA]," Paddock said. "It never ceases to amaze me that these groups who would claim to have significant ties to the trucking industry seem to have not even the first clue about the real issues facing the industry at the street level."
Paddock says the OTA would better serve the industry by seriously tackling issues like the "outrageous cost of insurance" or the "plague of unscrupulous load brokers.
"These just represent the tip of the iceberg of problems that we deal with on a daily basis," he says. "If Mr. Bradley and company are bored and looking for something to do – rather than wasting time addressing issues that are by his own admission, 'not an apparent crisis' – why not tackle these for starters?"
Lease-operator Ed Wesselius also finds the scheme rather dubious. While he's all for trucks operating at reasonable speeds for safety and better fuel economy, he says this plan has more to do with using the government to level the competitive playing field for carriers who are afraid of losing drivers to fleets without governors or strict speed rules.
Guelph, Ont.-based Wesselius lists a number of reasons why "castrating trucks in North America would not work the same as in Europe."
"European trucks come from the factories equipped with limiters so everyone's got them. There are warranty issues involved with using them over there, and the police have far more enforcement powers than they do here," he says. "In Canada you get a ticket and you call up a paralegal to get you off on a technicality – that's unheard of in Europe. You pretty much just have to pay the ticket."
GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE
As one might expect, there's widespread aversion on the drivers' part to governing trucks, yet there are an equal number who swear by operating at reasonable speeds.
"I do respect a tolerable speed limit with my own truck, mostly because of the tiny profit that's left to pay myself a decent wage after I pay for my fuel," says Jean Catudal, a lease-op based in Yamaska, Quebec, near Montreal.
And there are those who are just plain fed up with the prospect of more official intervention in their lives. "Just what were these guys smoking and drinking when they thought this one up?" asks owner-op, Doug McKenzie. "Whatever it was, they'd best be holding onto to whatever's left because they're gonna need it when they're dealing with whoever's left sitting in the seats if this ever goes through!"
Addressing some of the other concerns of existing drivers, McKenzie questions why the OTA would go down a path like this one when so many other issues are left undone, such as the quality of entry-level drivers.
"After near 35 years in this industry, nothing scares me more than the thought of some of these multi-axled wagons (7- to 10-axle combos weighing in excess of 140,000 pounds) hurtling down the boulevard flat-out with a newly-minted ticket in someone's pocket. They simply haven't any idea whatsoever what it would be like to try and get one of those things stopped in a hurry," he says.
"If OTA is as concerned about safety as they claim, maybe they could start urging the government to regulate driving schools."
While it's a well-acknowledged fact that trucks are far less likely to speed than cars, the OTA intends to proceed with this policy. Over the coming months, they plan to consult with various stakeholders, including OEMs, engine makers, the law enforcement community, and drivers too.
"The direction of the board is clear – speeding trucks, and trucks that sit in passing lanes, should no longer be tolerated," says OTA Chairman Scott Smith, CEO of JD Smith & Sons, a Toronto-based local and regional hauler. "We'll talk to carriers, truck drivers, government, police and motorists to answer questions like what speed trucks should be limited to, how to avoid tampering, how to deal with the fact that there are 60 jurisdictions in North America. But we are of the strong view that mandatory speed limitation for trucks is overdue. The technology already exists on current electronic engines. It just needs to be turned on. We've got the ability, why not use it?"
Jim Park is editor of Canada's highwayStar magazine, a driver and owner-operator publication similar to roadStar. He's also a contributor to Canada's Today's Trucking magazine, which serves a market similar to Heavy Duty Trucking.
