DIDO road safety: a shared responsibility

At any given time, the resource sector is exposed to a number of safety hazards and risks that can have adverse consequences. Driving constitutes a significant risk that can impact on the safety of any worker. Many remote and isolated sites have a heavy reliance on driving as part of site life. A high percentage of workers are required to drive to and from work, between mine sites or as part of a worker’s occupational duties (use of heavy machinery, plant or equipment).

While many companies have implemented, or are working towards implementing, vehicle monitoring systems and fatigue detection technology on-site, a gap remains in the safety of drivers who are travelling to and from work. This area needs further exploration and attention.

Road accidents have a significant and wide-reaching impact on family, friends, colleagues, the general community and emergency services. The emotional toll of such accidents cannot be measured in monetary form, yet families and organisations do face significant financial costs as a result of such an event. These include but not limited to:

• Workers compensation costs
• Loss of productivity and morale
• Loss of income for the families involved
• Funeral costs

According to the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics Road Deaths Database (2014), each year up to 1200 people lose their lives due to road crashes in Australia. Over the past eight years, almost two-thirds of all worker fatalities involved a vehicle; being divided approximately equally between vehicle accidents on public roads and vehicle accidents at a workplace or on a private road. Work-related road use is by far the most common cause of death in Australia, and given the difficulties in determining whether a road traffic accident was work-related, these estimations are considered to be an underestimation of the true extent of work-related crashes.

Furthermore, in what is a major concern for resource companies that employ mobile workforces, statistics highlighted by a recent parliamentary enquiry showed a rising accident and death toll on roads in DIDO (drive in drive out) regions.

So why is this happening? In a recent study conducted by TMS Consulting, it was discovered that a high risk for fatigue-related vehicle accidents was apparent in the resources sector due to the long working hours, long commute times and lack of sufficient sleep. Similar findings were noted in another study focusing on a DIDO workforce in the Bowen Basin, which discovered that the percentage of DIDO workers falling asleep while driving to commence work was up to 13% for day shift workers and up to 23% for night shift workers.

Anecdotal evidence has found that many workers leave the workplace straight after shift to drive on average three to four hours home; with some drivers reportedly driving up to nine hours (900 km) in a single trip. From a fatigue perspective, this is a high-risk time as workers can be awake between 17 and 20 hours by this stage, further impacted by the amount of sleep and work in the previous days. This is equivalent to driving with a blood alcohol level exceeding .05.

Through modern technology, there is the capability to quantitatively measure both speed and blood alcohol content. There have also been many preventive mechanisms put in place to minimise the risk of vehicle-related accidents. Fatigue, on the other hand, is not so advanced. A testing system that can objectively determine whether an individual is fatigued or not is yet to be developed. Instead, we rely on workers to report symptoms of fatigue. As a result, the focus has been primarily on awareness campaigns and signage. That being said, speeding and alcohol are still our two biggest causes of vehicle-related deaths.

With this in mind, organisations need to put safe driving as a high priority on their safety agenda. Driving long distances, particularly after a long shift, can take a toll on workers and this is a risk that needs to be better managed. There is not only a duty of care to look after workers while at site but also on the journey to and from work.

The current working culture at most sites is to ‘tough it out’, where workers do not want to look weak in front of their work mates and so will operate under dangerous conditions simply to uphold the expected image. This is where a shared responsibility model can play an important part in clarifying the role of both worker and manager in managing factors that may impact on fitness for work, such as fatigue, alcohol, drugs and mental stress. Further, the workplace needs to implement safe systems of work to identify, assess and manage risks that may impact on an individual’s safety and fitness for work.

Sometimes we see resistance from employers to manage the risks associated with the commute to and from work because they see that it falls outside of their responsibility, or that the risks involved with commuting are perceived as too complex for them to manage. Despite these assertions, organisations do have a duty of care to identify the risks associated with driving - whether it be between work sites, on the work site or travelling home - and put in place strategies to minimise the risk of harm.

It is acknowledged that transient workforces can be difficult to manage, and while fatigue cannot be measured as such, there are various strategies that can be put in place to manage the risk and ensure employees arrive safely to their destination.

As a starting point, utilisation of a robust fatigue risk management system can assist in minimising the risk of fatigue when commuting. In addition, organisations can implement a journey management software solution that automates an escalation alert when travellers fail to reach their final destination. While journey management software is unable to prevent an accident, it can alert the organisation at the earliest possible opportunity that something may be amiss - which is particularly important in accidents in remote areas where the response time is critical.

Other strategies to manage commuting-related risks could include:

• In-vehicle monitoring systems
• Electronic employee attendance systems which help to control and limit excessive work hours, overtime, etc
• Ongoing training and education on safe driving practices
• Minimising private vehicle use for commuting and/or introducing bus services
• Specialised rostering software which may help limit fatiguing work schedules and/or incorporate commuting hours into the work schedule
• Regular and auditable vehicle maintenance
• Purchasing vehicles with high safety ratings
• Efficient hazard, incident and near-miss reporting systems
• Random drug and alcohol blood testing of employees
• Sleep disorder screening in high-risk employees and drivers

By creating an awareness of the fatigue and journey management considerations, organisations can work towards identifying and, in turn, mitigating this often silent but serious risk.

A large percentage of site workers will travel by vehicle at some point during their life at site and, in turn, are prone to the risks of driving. It is imperative that organisations be proactive in implementing effective solutions to ensure that their workers get to work and then home to their families safely.

*Teegan Modderman BSc (Hons) MOrgPsych GCFRM MAPS is a Registered Psychologist, currently working as a Senior Consultant at TMS Consulting. Teegan has worked with organisations across a variety of industries including transport, rail, oil and gas, mining and water to develop, implement, manage and evaluate tailored fatigue risk management and journey management systems.