Crash Prevention: Are You Proactive or Reactive?

When a vehicle crash occurs, the first questions a trucking company will likely ask are: What happened? Is everyone okay? Which party was at fault? Unfortunately, at this point, the motor carrier is already in a reactive state, trying to gather details and determine how severe the loss will be. It is an unenviable position to be in, and, as the facts emerge, the motor carrier will turn its attention to determining if the crash was preventable and what, if anything, can be done to prevent it from happening again.

While post-crash investigations can be fruitful in helping identify loss exposures, motor carriers are cautioned not to rely solely on this practice. Focusing on who was at fault and if a crash could have been prevented are certainly important questions to answer, but motor carriers should be focused more on proactive measures to prevent losses before they occur. In doing so, they not only avoid all of the consequences of a crash but also better position themselves to experience greater returns on their prevention efforts, such as increased productivity, improved employee morale, decreased turnover, and ultimately, a healthier bottom line.

One difference between a reactive and proactive approach is performance indicators. Lagging indicators, such as the driver’s speed, length of skid marks, and road conditions at the time of the crash, are factors that contributed to a specific crash. Investigators can use this data to determine if the driver did everything within reason to prevent the crash from occurring. In addition, post-crash corrective steps can be taken to prevent a reoccurrence; steps include additional training, governing truck speeds, and disciplinary actions.

Leading indicators can be found by adopting a proactive approach to loss prevention. This technique involves analyzing the company’s operations and looking for hazards that could potentially lead to a future loss. This data can then be used to find ways to either avoid those hazards or eliminate them. For example, imagine a 10-unit motor carrier has exceeded the intervention threshold in the Unsafe Driving BASIC. On further review, the motor carrier discovers its drivers have received numerous high-severity violations in the past two years, including excessive speeding and texting while driving. Knowing these unsafe behaviors are common factors in vehicle crashes, the motor carrier can take corrective action to change the driver’s behavior, and perhaps make operational changes to stop such behavior, thereby minimizing the likelihood of a crash.

Another benefit of being proactive is loss mitigation. When a motor carrier’s driver is involved in a crash with a third party, it is common for the plaintiff’s attorney to attack the motor carrier with claims of negligent hiring or negligent retention. By demonstrating its proactive measures, such as road-testing drivers, establishing hiring and retention standards, and enforcing safety policies, the motor carrier can better defend itself against such claims.

Call to Action

• Monitor SMS scores regularly to identify negative trends in the motor carrier’s BASIC measures.

• Develop written hiring and retention standards for drivers.

• Implement a near-miss reporting program that rewards drivers for communicating hazardous conditions to management.