Transcript FedFleet Distracted Driving

Runzheimer International
Government Workshop
Training Session 4 – June 26
FedFleet 2012
Distracted Driving:
Is your agency at risk?
©Runzheimer International 2012
Distracted Driving
Today’s Agenda
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Distracted Driving Background
Defining the Problem
Types and Causes of Distracted Driving
Federal Government Data
Agency Risk
Consequences – Cost and Liability
Prevention and Policy Enforcement
©Runzheimer International 2012
2
Distracted Driving
Can take many forms
Photo credits: carinsurance.org and claybennett.com
©Runzheimer International 2012
3
Distracted Driving:
Reviewing the Numbers
We are both a “Mobile” & “Connected” Society
1.
As of December 2011
A.
B.
C.
D.
2.
3.
US Population: 311 Million (est.)
# of Mobile Phones: 331.6 Million
# of Licensed Drivers: 203 million
# of Mobile subscribers: 285 million
CTIA’s March 2010 wireless survey showed
that 91% of all Americans had a cell phone.
Using a cell phone while driving reduces brain
activity associated with driving by 37%.
1. Census Bureau, DOT. 2. CTIA. 3. Carnegie Mellon.
©Runzheimer International 2012
4
Distracted Driving:
Reviewing the Numbers 2
4.
Texting
A. Headset cell phone use is not substantially safer
than hand-held use.
B. In June 2011, more than 196 billion text
messages were sent or received in the US, up
more than 50% from June 2009.
C. 40% of all American teens say they have been in
a car when the driver used a cell phone in a way
that put people in danger.
D. The average teenager sends 3,339 texts per
month.
A. VTTI B. CTIA C. Pew Research D. Nielsen Company
©Runzheimer International 2012
5
Distracted Driving:
Reviewing the Numbers 3
4.
Texting (cont’d)
E. The texting problem isn’t confined to one
demographic group:
©Runzheimer International 2012
6
Distracted Driving:
Real World Examples - 1
The bus driver was
talking on a handsfree cell phone and
missed all of these
posted warning
signs.
National Transportation Safety Board
©Runzheimer International 2012
7
Distracted Driving:
Real World Examples - 2
National Transportation Safety Board
©Runzheimer International 2012
8
Distracted Driving:
Real World Examples - 3
National Transportation Safety Board
©Runzheimer International 2012
9
Distracted Driving:
Real World Examples - 4
National Transportation Safety Board
©Runzheimer International 2012
10
Distracted Driving:
Defining the Problem
• Half of our workers are mobile and feel the
need to be connected to their employer.
©Runzheimer International 2012
11
Distracted Driving:
We’ve All Seen It
©Runzheimer International 2012
12
Distracted Driving:
Three Categories
1.
Visual – Taking your eyes off the road
Photo credit: Kristin Oguntoyinbo/UNC Highway Safety
Research Center
©Runzheimer International 2012
13
Distracted Driving:
Three Categories
2.
Physical – Taking your hand(s) off of the
steering wheel
Photo credit: Kristin Oguntoyinbo/UNC Highway Safety
Research Center
©Runzheimer International 2012
14
Distracted Driving:
Three Categories
3.
Cognitive – Not paying attention to the road
Photo credit: Kristin Oguntoyinbo/UNC Highway Safety
Research Center
©Runzheimer International 2012
15
Distracted Driving Kills
1.
2.
25 - 50% of auto accidents are caused by
driver distraction due to mobile phone usage.
Cell phone distractions annually cause:
A. 1.1 million crashes
B. 500,000 injuries
C. 5,000 deaths
3.
4.
Drivers’ texting are 23 times more likely to
have an accident or near miss (and that’s 8
times higher than driving drunk!).
Federal Government drivers have an accident
rate over 8 times that of the average
American driver.
1. AAA. 2. NHTSA. 3. Virginia Tech Transportation Institute. 4. GSA Fleet.
©Runzheimer International 2012
16
Distracted Driving:
Most Common Causes
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Texting
Interact with/Look at Dispatching device
Write on pad, in notebook, etc.
Use calculator
Look at map
Dial cell phone
Talk/Listen on cell phone
Talk/Listen on hands-free cell phone
Talk/Listen on CB radio
OSHA
©Runzheimer International 2012
17
GSA Fleet Safety Statistics
Accidents:
FY09: 7,950
FY10: 7,881
FY11: 7,616
Incidents:
FY09: 16,172
FY10: 16,749
FY11: 16,177
Average accidents per million miles:
FY09: 3.67
FY10: 3.7
FY11: 3.73
Fatalities
FY 2009
9
FY 2010
9
FY 2011
10
©Runzheimer International 2012
18
GSA Fleet Accidents by Type, FY2011
5477
4611
3869
1031
©Runzheimer International 2012
730
396
269
38
6
19
GSA Fleet Accident Breakdown, FY2011
Fleet Vehicle Accidents, FY 2011
30%
single-car
multi-car
70%
©Runzheimer International 2012
20
Distracted Driving:
Is Costly
1.
2.
Motor vehicle crashes are consistently the leading
cause of fatalities in the workplace.
On the job crashes cost employers, on average:
A. $24,500 per crash
B. $150,000 per injury
C. $3.6 million per fatality
3. The legal theory of respondeat superior, or
vicarious responsibility, means an employer may be
held legally accountable for negligent employee
actions if the employee was acting within the scope
of his/her employment at the time of a crash,
including government employees.
1. CDC. 2. NHTSA. 3. NSC, et al.
©Runzheimer International 2012
21
Federal Government Liability
Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA)
• The FTCA permits private parties to sue the
United States in a federal court for most torts
committed by persons acting on behalf of the
United States.
• …"[t]he United States [is] liable . . . in the same
manner and to the same extent as a private
individual under like circumstances, but [is not]
liable for interest prior to judgment or for
punitive damages." Federal courts have
jurisdiction over such claims, but apply the law of
the state "where the act or omission occurred.”
28 U.S.C. 2674.
©Runzheimer International 2012
22
FTCA Origin
©Runzheimer International 2012
23
Distracted Driving:
Can Get You Sued
Ford v. McGrogan & International Paper – $5.2
million settlement (2008):
Here an employee of International Paper rearended another car while distracted by use of a
mobile phone. The plaintiff, whose arm had to be
amputated as a result of the crash, sued
International Paper under a theory of vicarious
responsibility. Even though International Paper
had previously adopted a policy banning
employees from using a cell phone while driving,
it nevertheless agreed to settle the case for $5.2
million.
©Runzheimer International 2012
24
Distracted Driving:
Government Liability
1.
2.
3.
4.
Gray vs. Prince George’s County, Maryland
(2009) - $4 million verdict
State of Hawaii (1996) - $1.5 million verdict
Obregon vs. the City of Palo Alto, CA (2010) $1.45 million verdict
State of Illinois (2007) - $8.7 million verdict
©Runzheimer International 2012
25
Distracted Driving:
Can Get You Sued
Nueces County, TX Case no.10-61510-2: CocaCola– $21 million judgment (2012):
A Coca-Cola driver struck and killed another driver
while on their cell phone. The jury heard
overwhelming evidence of how Coca Cola knew of
the dangers of using a cell phone while driving,
including having a cognitive distraction of 37% while
on a cell phone. The jury heard that Coca Cola
withheld this information from its employee driver,
in addition to the data on the numbers of deaths
and injuries arising from cell phone use while
operating vehicles, according to court documents.
©Runzheimer International 2012
26
Distracted Driving:
Can Be Illegal
1.
2.
3.
39 states have banned some form of cell phone
usage while driving.
11 states, DC and the Virgin Islands have total bans
on handheld devices.
Executive Order 13513, signed in 2009, mandates:
A. No texting & driving in Federal Government vehicles.
B. No texting & driving by Federal Government
employees, or contractors, with a mobile device
provided by the Federal Government, even if in a POV.
4.
Certain drivers have additional regulation:
A. Novice Drivers: 31 states & DC ban all cell phone use.
B. School Bus Drivers: 19 states & DC ban cell phone use.
5. Chapel Hill, NC bans all cell phone use while driving.
1., 2., 4., 5. IIHS. 3. Executive Order 13513.
©Runzheimer International 2012
27
Distracted Driving:
Can Put You in Prison
Essex County, MA vs. Aaron Deveau (2012):
• Deveau was charged with motor vehicle
homicide and negligent operation of a motor
vehicle, using a mobile phone while operating a
motor vehicle, reading or sending an electronic
message, a marked lanes violation, and two
counts of negligent operation and injury from
mobile phone use.
• He became the first driver in Massachusetts to
be convicted of motor vehicle homicide by
texting, has been sentenced to 2.5 years in
prison and loss of his license for 15 years
©Runzheimer International 2012
28
Distracted Driving:
Restrictive
National Transportation Safety Board
• In December 2011, NTSB recommended that all
50 states and the District of Columbia enact
complete bans of all portable electronic devices
for all drivers – including banning use of handsfree devices.
• This recommendation follows their total ban
recommendation for commercial drivers in
October, 2011.
• Several companies have already instituted total
cell phone bans, including: UPS, DuPont,
Chevron, CSX, Shell, Time Warner and OwensCorning.
NTSB, Washington Post
©Runzheimer International 2012
29
Distracted Driving:
Prevention & Enforcement
Policy:
“It is the employer’s responsibility and legal obligation to
have a clear, unequivocal, and enforced policy against texting
and driving.” OSHA, 10/2/2010.
Reality:
• Companies are increasingly concerned: 80% of companies
have adopted written policies pertaining to the use of mobile
devices while employees are driving on-the-job - a 29%
increase since last year.
• Efforts to enforce policies have increased: 86% of companies
now take steps to enforce their documented policies - a 62%
increase from last year.
• Confidence in current enforcement methods has decreased:
Only 26% of companies say they are "very confident" that
current enforcement efforts are sufficient to modify driver
behavior.
• Interest in cell phone compliance technology grows: 26% of
companies plan to evaluate technology solutions within the
next twelve months to help manage compliance with
documented policies.
©Runzheimer International 2012
30
Distracted Driving:
Prevention & Enforcement
Cell Phone Policies:
• Employers can and should design cell phone
policies to follow best safety practice, reduce
significant risks and minimize liability.
Employers should implement cell phone policies
which include:
–
–
–
–
–
Handheld and hands-free devices
All employees
All company vehicles
All company cell phone devices
All work-related communications – even in a
personal vehicle or on a personal cell phone
NSC
©Runzheimer International 2012
31
Distracted Driving:
Prevention & Enforcement
Having a policy is not enough! Employers
need to:
• Educate employees
• Monitor compliance
• Enforce the policy
• Address violations
NSC
©Runzheimer International 2012
32
Distracted Driving:
Prevention & Enforcement
What solutions are out there?
A. Mobile apps
B. In-vehicle cameras
C. GPS Telematics capture devices
A. Passive
B. Active
©Runzheimer International 2012
33
Distracted Driving:
Prevention & Enforcement
So what’s the Best Solution?
• The best solution is to have restrictive policies,
training, monitoring, and proactive enforcement
appropriate to the risk threshold of the agency.
• Risk can never be entirely eliminated, and different
companies are comfortable assuming risk at different
levels.
• However, by following the basic best practices
outlined above, you should be able to appropriately
minimize the risk to your agency from the distracted
driving practices of employees.
©Runzheimer International 2012
34
Distracted Driving:
The Reality
©Runzheimer International 2012
35
Distracted Driving:
Q&A
©Runzheimer International 2012
36