How would you treat this accident and why

[tieguy]

Nice graphic. Like I said before you could have some value here if you didn't go out of your way to piss people off.

 

[tieguy]

See Tie, you have many people here that love you. So lighten up.

Just because we take differing views on the same subject does not really make either one of us wrong. Or right. But it does get all sides to the same conversation out in the open.

Which is what this site is all about?

Sincerely

d

Actually it was more of a concession after you told me the two deer accidents were charged as avoidable. I can't defend that nor can I defend giving warning letters for dog bites. I try to see some logic in those decisions but couldn't find any.

 

[trickpony1]

Tie-
I love you too

 

[dannyboy]

I can't defend that nor can I defend giving warning letters for dog bites. I try to see some logic in those decisions but couldn't find any.

Tie, for all the heated discussions you and I have had, those statements are what I respect. For a management person to admit that others in management are real goofballs is tough. AT times you are brutally honest.

This is what I was trying to get at with my post. There is not a level playing field when it comes to avoidable or unavoidable. In many cases, common sense is totally missing in the decision. And many times the descision is only made by one person. Where as a panel of say 6 or 7 would give you a more even level of decisions.

d

 

[tieguy]

Tie-
I love you too

you guys are killing me. I can't find an adequate response to these types of comments anywhere in my management [-]brainwashing[/-] guide.

 

[tieguy]

This is what I was trying to get at with my post. There is not a level playing field when it comes to avoidable or unavoidable. In many cases, common sense is totally missing in the decision. And many times the descision is only made by one person. Where as a panel of say 6 or 7 would give you a more even level of decisions.

d

I'm not opposed to the idea. The idea though would be a panel similar to our grievance panel when set up. The problem as I'm sure you know from your steward days is that we have people that feel they did not get a fair shake from a panel either. The union reps tend to be under a lot of pressure to find for the defendent since they would be accused of being in the companies back pocket if they don't. I think we would have to work towards having representatives from each side sent to the same credible school for training in accident investigations.

the question is what do you want to accomplish?

the easy answer is we stop charging deer accidents as avoidable.
The companies mindset is now at a point where we take a driver who has unavoidable accidents and we still do a follow up ride and we still treat them as a repeater if they have had two recent unavoidables. My point is it almost does not matter if the accident was avoidable or not.

Now back to your example. I realize your gripe with the avoidable / unavoidable concept being applied as fault or no fault which I think is what we are really talking about. If we determine that the driver could have avoided this accident by clearing his mirrors and we then train all our people to clear their left rear side before making a left turn. And this training then results in less accidents of this type then didn't we actually accomplish something significant? Would putting the decision in front of a panel that deadlocks then undermine support for future changes we try to implement?

Perhaps we should have a third option on accident investigations a system avoidable rulling for this case. We rule the accident could have been avoidable but realize that our system has not stressed training drivers to clear their left mirror before making a left turn.

Overall though your panel idea has merit. It goes back to what should be a basic tenant of management. There is only one jim casey. the rest of us who wear the attractive neck chokers should solicit the input of our work group if we really want to improve the overall processes.

 

[dannyboy]

Tie

I could not agree with you more.

Even if the accident is unavoidable, It is my contention that the driver should have a safety ride the next day. Not just for five minutes either, the whole day. No matter how safe you are, putting safety out there each and every day as a serious issue for each of our drivers is of utmost importance. I know drivers that have never had any accidents in 30 years that will tell you that they can improve their personal safety picture even more, and welcome any and all training.

The question is are the managers committed to safety or just filling out forms.

My personal feeling is a bit of both.

Corp demands that they keep good records, document actions taken with "repeaters" etc etc. But what really happens for all that documentation. Not much really.

I always thought that a mentoring process where you pair a new driver with one that has a good track record in safety would work well. Letting the seasoned driver show the new driver how the work is done well and safely. Not some delivery sup that just got the promotion after spending 6-12 months in delivery or less, that only wants to churn out numbers, and as long as the numbers are there, turn a blind eye to unsafe methods.

It has always been my contention that if you find out how to do the job right, give an honest effort, do it by the book (mostly anyway), and do it safely, then the numbers will follow. Ive seen it too many times for it not to work.

d

 

[MissedBusiness]

Was Kobiashi Maru the Star fleet Academy test that Captain Kirk cheated at and won?

Yes! But it was from the movie The Wrath of Khan.