Digital v Analogue Tachograph

Summary

The introduction of the digital tachograph, available from 2004 and mandated for newly-registered trucks from spring 2006, has provided advantages for both drivers and operators; it has also posed challenges to some operators and uncertainties that required clarification.

A VOSA/RHA trial demonstrated that in some operations, where a driver has been using most of his allowed hours, there may be an impact, including on the cost and the organisation of driver shifts when the regime of the digital tachograph is compared to accepted custom and practice with analogues.

Criticisms of the efficiency of the device are justified in terms of the ‘rounding-up’ issue but the impact of that in practical terms can be largely dismissed, based on current extensive evidence and enforcement practice.

The ‘15-minute’ discretionary concession worked out in Brussels in late 2007 makes little if any practical difference in the UK, where a case-by-case discretion is already applied.

The practical impact of off-road driving being included in driver’s hours records must be borne in mind. If there is evidence that queuing practice needs to be tightened, the RHA can highlight this issue to members and customers.

Advantages

Record keeping can be greatly simplified. Waxed paper charts are replaced by a digital smart card and it is easier to carry, store and produce records.

Generally speaking, the driver smart card is a more robust storage medium than the previous charts.

Centre field entries have been eliminated due to the details being transferred automatically between card and the vehicle unit upon card insertion and withdrawal.

Data can be rapidly analysed and compliance reports generated by either operator-hosted software or internet-based analysis. These have been developed to allow individuals to view their own data remotely at a time that suits them.

Compliance with both drivers’ hour’s rules and the Road Transport Directive on working time can be checked more rapidly, with immediate availability of the information. Data may be transmitted electronically; most charts continue to rely on the postal service.

Record-keeping on the vehicle unit is available for the first time with the digital tachograph, allowing verification of driver data, both by the operator and enforcement agencies.

Digital tachograph services have developed since introduction. The latest generation devices allow for remote card and vehicle unit downloading via either GPRS or WLAN, ensuring accurate data is received by the operator, despite the vehicle being away from base for protracted periods.

Challenges

Anecdotal evidence suggested that there was considerable variance between digital and analogue tachographs, with the digital recording significantly more driving time. Operators reported that vehicles were running in tandem on journeys and substantially different driving times being recorded by the two equipment types.

Unfortunately, the records had no scientific value as there were too many variables involved. VOSA sought to establish scientific data and the challenge was picked up by the RHA, which identified two haulier members who were happy to establish a trial and to open their records to inspection.

VOSA commissioned a trial involving both analogue and digital recording equipment being fitted to a truck at two haulage firms. The trial lasted for four weeks.

The conclusions from the trial were;
  • The digital equipment was recording exactly as the EU legislation intended.
  • There was a variance in recorded driving time. This amounted in most cases to at most 10-to-15 minutes during a working day, although on some runs the difference was as high as 30 minutes. The longer periods of variance were found on journeys that involved periods of ‘stop / start’ driving, with short stationary periods, or where the truck was queuing on a motorway. A key reason for the difference is not variances in the way driving time is recorded; more the cumulative impact of the way analogue charts are often ‘cautiously’ analysed, with small movements being ignored.
  • The impact on individual operations could be significant, where drivers were running close to their 90-hour fortnightly maximum, to the extent of losing one driver shift, or having to put a long-distance driver on local work for a reduced shift, where the work is available. This was especially true when the impact of the inclusion off-road driving in 561/2006 was factored into the driving record.
  • There was a recognition by the hauliers involved in the trial that the rules has been tightened; and a recognition that the industry could be considered to have been “getting away with” some additional driving in the past. The VOSA trial, arranged in partnership with the RHA, generated data comparing analogue and digital recording that was reliable and verifiable. In practice, it threw up few if any surprises to VOSA but it did confirm what VOSA suspected to be the case and strengthened confidence in understanding of the application and impact of the digital tachograph in practice. VOSA has expressed its appreciation and thanks to the RHA and to the members involved.

How the Digital Tachograph records

The digital tachograph assigns a calendar minute to ‘driving’ when vehicle movement is detected in that minute. If the vehicle unit detects signals from the motion sensor for more than five consecutive seconds, it will record ‘driving.’Detection of impulses is discreet rather than cumulative. In other words, a vehicle could move a number of times in a calendar minute, each one for five seconds or less and the digital tachograph would not record ‘driving’.

On the other hand, programming rules result in a calendar minute that is stationary, being recorded as ‘driving’ if the calendar minutes either side of the stationary minute are recorded as ‘driving.’ At first glance this may appear to be perverse. However, if we consider what the action of driving actually involves, especially in the light of R. v MacDonagh [1974] Q.B. 448 where it was ruled that ‘driving’ was the activity of sitting behind the steering wheel in order to control the movement of the vehicle, the storage rule makes sense in the vast majority of cases. In other words, the court was stating that we have to break the mindset that ‘driving’ means that the vehicle is moving.

By contrast, the analogue will actually record slightly more driving time than the digital. It will, for example, mark movements of only a second or so. In practice, such records will usually only be taken into account in ultra-detailed forensic analysis.

There is little difference between the analogue and digital devices in terms of switching to record ‘other work’ when the engine is running – for example at a customer’s premises or in a traffic jam – where there is no movement for several minutes.

Where a driver is going over his hours unexpectedly, for example due to an exceptional hold-up on a motorway, he should make a note that an enforcement officer can inspect at a future time. This relates to Article 12 of 561/2006, finding a safe place to park, not to the digital tachograph.

The 15-minute tolerance

Enforcement guidance from Brussels suggests that it is possible for the enforcement authorities of a Member State to apply a discretionary tolerance to the driving period of 15 minutes. The guidance makes particular reference to vehicles involved in multi-drop operations and the 4.5-hour cumulative driving period, where the driver can demonstrate that he has been involved in such activity. Further, it should be borne in mind that the EU guidance states that occasional and not frequent breaches will be permitted and only where evidence of multi-drop operation is determined.

VOSA already applied a discretionary tolerance to the analysis of all driving and break / rest periods. It is felt that the current arrangements cater for the tolerance discussed in the guidance. For this reason, the Brussels guidance note makes little or no practical change to the enforcement position in the UK.

VOSA notes that a driver of a vehicle fitted with digital recording equipment has the capability to check their current accumulated driving time; in reality there is little or no excuse for them breaching the legislative limits. There was a problem with the displays on early Stoneridge tachographs, which could show a variance with the recorded driving time; that problem has been rectified on models from
late 2007.

Minimising recorded driving time

It is possible for drivers to minimise their driving time, especially when involved in queuing. The main action is not to continually creep forward in slow moving traffic. If they remain stationary and then cover the distance between their vehicle and the one in front, the ‘driving’ record will be interrupted by periods of other activity, usually ‘work’. Council Regulation 561/2006 defines driving as the ‘period recorded automatically or semi-automatically by the equipment’. An enforcement officer would sum only the periods shown as ‘driving’ and discount those periods recorded as another activity. The RHA strongly recommends to members and drivers that queuing behaviour on-site be adjusted accordingly.

Additionally, it may be that a haulier runs out of driving time and requires to take a break relating to the 4.5-hour driving period whilst queuing on customers’ premises. This can cause problems if the customer refuses to allow the driver to stop. We are unclear as to how common this problem is but clearly, should be minimised through advanced planning, good queuing practice and greater cooperation from the customer/receiving company.

This has particular relevance when driving time as recorded by analogue equipment is compared with that recorded by digitally-equipped vehicles.