This Status Update sheds new light on our evolving understanding of distracted driving, it’s contributing factors and compounding factors.
The article begins with a clear admonition followed by the conclusion of this most recent study:
Using a cellphone while driving is risky and can lead to crashes. Making or taking calls, texting, or interacting with an electronic device in any way can take your eyes off the road at a critical moment…
…A new study by IIHS in partnership with Virginia Tech helps clarify the risk of cellphone use behind the wheel and offers insight into other distracting things drivers do when they aren’t using cellphones. The research points to the need for a broader strategy to deal with the ways that drivers can be distracted.
It seems that as soon as this study and it’s summaries were released, critics came shouting that the study undermines the need to be vigilant in discouraging cell phone use of any type. However, the article makes it plainly clear that cell use isn’t the only issue we need to consider (yes, avoid cells, but no, don’t myopically focus on cells as the sole problem source)
Here’s the rub. While cell use has skyrocketed, during the same time period, overall crash rates have plummeted.
What does that mean? From the study:
This doesn’t mean phone use behind the wheel is harmless. Numerous experimental studies have shown that talking on a cellphone reduces a driver’s reaction time, potentially increasing crash risk. Cellphone use also affects how drivers scan and process information from the roadway. The cognitive distractions associated with cellphone use can lead to so-called inattention blindness in which drivers fail to comprehend or process information from objects in the road even if they are looking at them. Studies also have found negative effects of texting on driving performance. The research is still unfolding, but there is a basic conundrum: Why is a distracting behavior not increasing crash rates?“
The studies suggest a link between compounding behaviors and crash risk – when distracted in different ways or by more than one type of distraction, crash risk seems to go up. So “multitasking” while driving = you’re not really driving, you’re busy being productive at your day job instead. Plus, some other behaviors seem to be even more problematic than talking on your phone.
This simply means we need to work at getting drivers to become more vigilant in their driving duties regardless of the nature or source of their distraction — indeed, put down the phone, but also stop the other distractions, too!
Work Truck magazine recently ran a great article titled; “Upfits Designed with Ergonomics in Mind.” It addresses common Worker Compensation injuries that may occur around work trucks — specifically from lifting and awkward movements leading to sprains, strains and chronic pain.
The article provides some detailed facts to provide context and highlight the seriousness of these injuries:
The U.S. Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OHSA) estimates that work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) in the U.S. account for more than 600,000 injuries and illnesses, about 34 percent of all lost workdays reported to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). MSDs are especially prevalent in the transportation and material moving sector, with the third-highest incident rate among all industries in 2011, according to the BLS. And, each reported MSD incident can be expensive to employers, accounting for one out of every $3 spent on workers’ compensation, according to OSHA, which estimates that employers spend as much as $20 billion per year in direct costs for MSD-related workers’ compensation, and up to five times that much for indirect costs, such as those associated with hiring and training replacement workers.
The article provides six key areas where safety teams can get started with engineering changes that reduce the risks of injury:
Recessed Bulkheads/ Partitions
In-Cab Work Stations
Drop-Down Ladder Racks
Adding Steps and Handles
Using Liftgates
Roll Out Cargo Beds
Each area can reduce stress, and make lifting and reaching easier on the job.
The print edition of the magazine includes many photographs to provide contextual insight on how these devices work and would help your mobile workforce.
This article caught my attention at the second paragraph:
Crashes involving trucks and the resulting insurance claims can grab quite a chunk from the bottom line of any motor carrier [or any company operating a fleet of vehicles – SF]. According to data compiled several years ago by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), the cost of a crash involving one Class 8 tractor pulling a single 53-ft. trailer runs to $172,292. If just one person gets injured in such a crash, the average cost balloons to $334,892. And if a fatality occurs in such a crash, the average cost skyrockets to over $7.6 million.
The article also comments that insurance costs to cover premiums and out of pocket costs can be as much as 4% of the total cost of operation (TCO).
Fleets looking to reduce their costs can ask for discounts and creative payment plans, but in order to materially reduce insurance expense, the only long-term solution is to earnestly work to reduce their risk of loss through aggressive and tailored crash-avoidance strategies.
Naturally, we can’t control how the general public drives on any given day, but as transportation safety professionals, fleet management teams can work with their commercial drivers, insurers, and current safety vendors to increase results.
Ideas to consider:
Smash through the most common barrier to results: complacency. Many fleet teams think they’ve done all that they can and sometimes it can be hard to re-evaluate and re-tool programs to get better results. “We’ve always done it this way” and “don’t fix what isn’t broken” are dangerous phrases if you’re sincere about enhancing risk results. It’s easy to assume that everything is working well and focus on trying “new stuff” just because it’s new and trendy, but sometimes it’s the underlying (un-sexy) tasks that are slipping through the cracks. Be honest in evaluating what’s working and what could work better.
Increase vigilance and safety awareness – just as consciously scanning the road ahead for possible hazards and motorists who may cut off trucks is critical to safe driving, management teams also have a responsibility to forecast ways to increase safety in their operations and processes. Careful analysis of past crashes and understanding what might have contributed to them happening from a process and systems standpoint may uncover opportunities to improve your management strategy.
Develop an even stronger communication strategy with drivers – not just talking at them or demanding more from them, but also learning to listen carefully to their feedback about what’s working and what’s failing to work as well as it could or should. Understanding what processes and systems keep drivers from excelling at their job and helping them with appropriate assistance could be an area to leverage.
Integrate technology where it will help the most. Technology can be applied in most fleet operations to help deliver insights into ways to increase efficiency or improve safety factors. The trouble is that for most fleets technology can be disruptive as well.There’s a learning curve to adopting new systems and there must be vigilance in translating these data packets into meaningful management action. If the follow up isn’t helpful to drivers or other team members, then it may not be worth the effort. One example could be adopting an online education program to refresh drivers on basic safety issues. If the program is difficult to access, or the videos are tedious, too long, boring or poorly executed then drivers won’t pay attention or change habits. Investing in a system that is easy to use and has interesting, short programs may be a better course of action.
Actively monitor / manage your CSA scores. While the CSA score isn’t the best indicator of operational excellence, your team shouldn’t ignore this score, either. The Bookend BASICS have been discussed elsewhere on this blog — Unsafe Driving and Crash Rate. When the bookends are firmly managed, the stuff in the middle tends to sort itself out, too.
Don’t be shy in asking for help from your insurer. Most insurers offer loss control support in various ways — consultants, technical bulletins, and other resources are available but only if you ask for them. Agents can review your current policies to make sure you have appropriate coverage, and help you navigate the service offerings that come with your policy to be certain you’re getting the maximum benefit for the cost you’ve already agreed to pay.
Leverage your existing safety vendor relationships. Many fleets already work with safety support vendors on issue ranging from log auditing to DQF maintenance.
Are you using the most current service offering from each vendor?
Are there new benefits or features that you could be using?
Does your vendor offer a support network, webinars, or other meetings that could introduce new ideas or help you network with peers in order to increase safety results?
Join, and participate in, a vehicle safety networking group. Hearing about other peer’s experiences can help you save time, get to decisions more quickly and leverage other professionals learning lessons (why make the same mistake, or why not benefit if they’ve already proven something works well?) Of course, this commitment works best when you’re an active participant – sharing with the group your own experiences. It won’t work as well if you join and then lurk in the shadows quietly.
Managing insurance costs is important. You want to have the right coverage for when things go wrong unexpectedly, but you also want to do whatever is practical to avoid claims or keep their costs as low as possible.
There are many safety articles at this blog site to give you more ideas on ways to prevent crashes.
Let us know what you do that works well at your fleet!
The most recent NHTSA study on crashes in the USA analyzed data from 2010. The results were published in May 2014. From that study:
In 2010, there were 32,999 people killed, 3.9 million were injured, and 24 million vehicles were damaged in motor vehicle crashes in the United States. The economic costs of these crashes totaled $277 billion. Included in these losses are lost productivity, medical costs, legal and court costs, emergency service costs (EMS), insurance administration costs, congestion costs, property damage, and workplace losses.
Key findings included:
Alcohol-involved crashes resulted in 13,323 fatalities, 430,000 nonfatal injuries, and $59.4 billion in economic costs in 2010, accounting for 21 percent of all crash costs.
Speed-relatedcrashes (where at least one driver was exceeding the posted limit OR driving too fast for conditions) were connected to 10,536 fatalities (another third of the total for the year). This represents 32 percent of all fatalities; 20 percent of all nonfatal injuries, and 16 percent of all property-damage-only crashes.
Seat belt non-userepresents an enormous lost opportunity for injury prevention. In 2010 alone, over 3,350 people were killed and 54,300 were seriously injured unnecessarily because they failed to wear their seat belts
Crashes in which at least one driver was identified as being distracted resulted in 3,267 fatalities…
As a nation of drivers, we continue to struggle with key behavior related issues like drinking and driving, speeding, failure to use seat belts and distracted driving. Our response to these issues over the years has been to target education and enforcement campaigns to try and convince drivers to change their habits voluntarily.
“Social norming” to get behavior change tends to be a very slow process and seems to have hit a plateau — we’ve made great gains in select areas since the 1970s — reducing impaired driving deaths from 50% of the annual total to 30%; increasing seat belt usage to an all-time high of roughly 84% (national average — some states are individually higher).
Unfortunately, we’ve slipped backwards on speeding with the removal of the national speed limit of 55 MPH previously established between 1974 and 1995. Further, the widespread use of electronic devices has contributed to a new group of crashes caused by driver inattention.
Over the past decade, much legislative and media attention has been devoted to “Distracted Driving” but not nearly as much to other (pardon the pun) ‘drivers’ (factors) of fatal crashes.
Consider society’s view of speeding in contrast to distracted driving. Most motorists look at speeding as a “non-issue” and not a “big deal” from a safety standpoint (AAFTS traffic safety culture surveys have documented a “prevailing attitude of “Do as I say, not as I do” on the part of American motorists”).
Recently a columnist participated in a “press drive” — a marketing opportunity hosted by a car manufacturer to let journalists test drive new or special edition models out on public roads. While each journalist was admonished to obey all traffic laws, this particular journalist was amazed at the power and acceleration of the test car and wound up getting clocked by police radar at 93 MPH in a 55 MPH zone. (To see his whole article about his speeding incident and subsequent three days in jail, click HERE)
Consider his reaction to the incident:
When I was pulled over during a press drive earlier this summer, I had been living in Washington D.C. for about a year and a half. In that time, I had been warned repeatedly — by ex-Virginia resident Matt Hardigree, by many of our readers, and by a host of other people — that you don’t ever speed in Virginia. But I had no clue just how serious the consequences would be.Maybe “serious” isn’t the right word. After everything that happened, “ridiculous” seems a little more accurate.[emphasis added]
I should probably explain why going into Virginia to have fun in a car is a bad idea in the first place. See, they’re crazy about speeding there. Really, really crazy. Speed limits are set absurdly low, 45 mph on some highways. [Virginia presumably follows the same federally recommended standards, or a derivative of those engineering practices when setting limits on roads based on design, traffic volume, etc.] Radar detectors are illegal, and cops have devices to detect them. And if you get caught going over 80 mph at all, that’s automatically a reckless driving charge.
Reckless driving is not a traffic citation, it’s a criminal charge, and a Class One misdemeanor at that. That means it’s the highest level of misdemeanor you can be charged with in Virginia, right below a felony. The maximum penalty for a reckless driving conviction is a $2,500 fine, a six month driver’s license suspension, and up to a year in jail.
See what I mean when I told you it’s serious? They hand it out like it’s Halloween candy, too. You drive 20 mph over the limit, it’s reckless driving. They even charge you with it for failing to properly signal, or when you’re found to be at fault in a car wreck. I’ve heard of some cases where people get 30 days in jail if they speed over 100 mph.
Other Class One misdemeanors in Virginia include animal cruelty, sexual battery, and aiming a firearm at someone. This is how the state regards people who drive over 80 mph.
I do think Virginia’s speed laws are absurdly harsh, especially as a native of Texas where 80 mph is an almost universally accepted highway speed by most drivers and where a toll road just outside of Austin lets you go 85 mph. There, this probably would have been a really expensive speeding ticket; maybe even one I could get dismissed with defensive driving.[emphasis added] I covered the courts for a long time when I was a newspaper reporter in Austin, and I was floored to learn Virginia actually sends people to jail just for speeding.
But that doesn’t excuse what I did. I came into Virginia and broke their laws; I drove way too fast. This is my fault and no one else’s. (Well, maybe the ZL1’s.) This wasn’t one of those moments where I got nailed going 5 mph over in some ridiculously low section of a county designed only for revenue collection; how could I justify going 93 in a 55 when I went to court, I wondered?
So, the driver hired an attorney to broker a plea deal with the court.
The best plea deal I got was a fine of about $400 with court costs, a 10-day suspension of my license in Virginia, and three days in jail. The judge has an option of giving one day in jail for every mile an hour over 90 mph, and he would exercise it here.
So I took the plea, but I was pretty despondent over the outcome for weeks. The fees and license suspension weren’t a big deal, but I was alternately livid and depressed that I’d be going to jail, even for a short stay. I didn’t hurt anyone, or kill anyone, or sell drugs, or drive drunk, or beat my wife, or steal; I was going to jail because I drove too fast in a car.
The best news of all this was that I wasn’t fired. Matt said the last thing you’ll ever get fired for at Jalopnik is speeding. It’s just an occupational hazard for us. And when I emailed Gawker’s editorial director Joel Johnson to apologize, he replied saying, “I don’t give a f**k,” and added that he found the matter “hilarious.”
Would this story have been different if the citation were for texting while driving instead of speeding? Would the editorial director have had the nerve to consider the situation “hilarious”?
From the recent NTHSA study:
The fact that a vehicle was exceeding the speed limit does not necessarily mean that this was the cause of the crash, but the probability of avoiding the crash would likely be greater had the driver or drivers been traveling at slower speeds. A speed-related crash is defined as any crash in which the police indicate that one or more drivers involved was exceeding the posted speed limit, driving too fast for conditions, driving at a speed greater than reasonable or prudent, exceeding a special speed limit or zone, or racing.
As long as we consider speeding to be our right, speed limits to be merely suggestions, and tickets as only a way for states to make revenue over a non-issue, we will continue to have a plateau in our traffic safety results. Things can not improve (i.e. people will not stop dying) until this nation breaks it’s obsession with speeding as an acceptable practice for motorists.
What do you think? IS speeding a non-issue? Or is it a deathly serious issue?
If your friends think getting a speeding ticket or spending three days in jail for speeding is “hilarious” then consider some of these Public Service Ads from countries that are more progressive in their safety attitude than the USA….
Australian PSA on how reducing speed (even by only 5 KPH) can save lives
Rushing = letting emotions control our better judgement when driving (Australian PSA)
Speeding – is it a ‘mistake’? New Zealand PSA
Irish PSA on speeding “you can’t control the consequences of speeding”
Keven Moore regularly authors articles on insurance and safety matters, and he’s come up with another brilliant summary of the sticky issue of using your personal vehicle for company business.
His original article can be found by clicking HERE.
Suppose your teenaged son or daughter wanted to deliver pizzas in his/her spare time to earn some cash towards their own car or reimbursing you for the gas they spend from your tank (I can dream, can’t I?) They get a job, but have a fender bender on their third week of working.
Surprise #1 = the pizza chain’s insurance is excess after your family coverage is exhausted.
Surprise #2 = your personal auto policy may specifically exclude any/all work related travel (other than commuting to an office or job location)
Surprise #3 = you’re now covering the whole claim out of pocket – not just your deductible. Ouch! (OK, I’m exaggerating — the employer’s coverage ought to kick in if they’ve got “non-owned auto” coverage and have listed the delivery driver’s vehicles, but…what if it didn’t?)
As Keven points out in his article;
…many auto insurance carriers exclude business use of personal vehicles, such as for delivering pizzas, flowers, sub sandwiches and groceries. As a result, there are tens of thousands of part-time delivery drivers riding around your streets today without coverage because of this exclusion on their auto insurance policy…Pizzerias that deliver are not going to come out and tell you that your auto insurance carrier will probably exclude you from their policy and that you are delivering pizzas without any insurance coverage. So it’s up to you to call your insurance agent to verify coverage.
Keven also offers some good reminders:
If you plan to use your personal auto on company business, inform your agent ahead of time and confirm that your policy will cover you in the event of a crash.
If you get a ticket on company business, it will still post to your personal MVR record (affecting your personal insurance rates and future employ-ability rating)
Many employers that require you to use your own vehicle will ask for proof that you have personal auto coverage, and what limits you carry. This helps them manage their risk that your coverage would be exhausted and their coverage would have to kick in to pay the claims.
Especially tragic crashes may go into litigation, and if the employer’s policy limits are exhausted in settling the claim, your personal assets could become a target to satisfy the judgement.
As employers, it’s important to make sure your drivers have adequate coverage if their operating their vehicles on the company’s behalf. As drivers, it’s also important to verify that you have sufficient coverage on your own car and that it covers business trips adequately.
SafetyFirst isn’t in the insurance business, but we work with a network of 75+ insurance providers. We also have employers who use our online services to help keep track of the insurance coverage of drivers who use their own cars on company business (while also looking at their MVR records, offering supplementary driver training, etc.) If you’re an employer who is struggling with record keeping issues related to driver safety and risk management, give us a call or check out our web site!
I’ve read a LOT of “Driver Safety” or “Fleet Safety” articles over the course of my 27 year career. They all look the same, they all cover the “basics” or “essentials” in the same way.
And many of them miss the mark in the same way.
You see, they’re not bad articles and the tips are meaningful, but instead fall short in one key area: managing the performance of your fleet drivers on a day to day basis.
The articles typically follow the same outline (highlighting import and valuable steps in the process):
Discuss the need for “top management support” for the fleet safety program
Stress the need to have awritten, enforced policy statementor handbook
Plead with the reader aboutrecruiting properly, qualifying prospective hires thoroughly and thoughtfully– following any/all applicable regulations, checking MVRs against a standard criteria
Emphasize the need to“train-train-train” the drivers(before they drive, as they drive and after they crash).
Then, alarmingly, these authors jump to the end of the story and tell you how:
Incentivesmay influence drivers to pay more attention to their driving
Drivers need toreport crashes,
Supervisors need toinvestigate the incidentswith great attention to detail
Management teams ought tocalculate their incident rates and benchmarkagainst peers to see if they’re trending up or down.
Looking at this visually, this is the picture I see in my mind:
My concern is filling or bridging that gap between thorough qualification and orientation/training processes and calculating results or offering incentives.
There’s a huge gap between the initial approach and the off ramp in that visualization.
In between initial hire and final exit interview should be many years of productive activity; therefore, finding ways to actively manage a group relationship with the cadre of drivers during their tenure as a productive employees becomes critical to leveraging consistent results.
The question may be “so how do I do that?” It can be a huge challenge, especially when we recognize that the drivers are largely away from the office for most of their working day. Further, many technological monitoring tools are both expensive (when you multiply the per vehicle per month cost across a larger fleet of vehicles) and burdensome (separating the “urgently actionable” conclusions from the “background noise” of excessive data).
What’s available in the toolbox to monitor and manage driver relationships, combat safety complacency, and promote proper vigilance or awareness on a daily basis?
Some fleets pick one of these monitoring/managing practices and run with it. This is certainly better than running bare and hoping for the best, but I’d submit that relying on only one strategy presents a pretty wobbly bridge that sways and flexes a lot. Adding layers builds strength and predictability in the program by covering up gaps that any one program may lack.
For instance,
if I were to rely on GPS alone, I wouldn’t know about red light running unless the drivers were stopped and ticketed by the police. GPS systems are not equipped to detect red light running.
if I were to rely on camera-in-cabin videos alone, I’d only find out about actual collisions in most cases (most systems rely on a triggering event to save the short loop of video and most drivers realize that by hitting curbs during the “break in period” the management team will adjust the sensitivity to the point where the system becomes a post-incident-event-recorder). This does not invalidate the program nor am I trying to dissuade its use, but as a “stand alone” system it may have a vulnerability.
if I were to rely only on driver education without other systems to alert me to actual driver habits, I’d be asking drivers to give up productive drive time to train on topics that may not be a fit to each driver’s own habits.
By combining data inputs from how’s my driving, telematics, cameras, etc. I can tailor the coaching and education to accomplish more in less time: train the right drivers on the right topics at the right time (when they really need it).
Here’s how I see the fleet that prioritizes building layers to give a solid foundation to their fleet safety program:
The other very real advantage to drivers is that by being a benevolent “big brother” the management team has the ability to help them modify habits before incurring violations (which are typically paid out of pocket, influence personal/family insurance costs, and negatively affect future employment prospects).
Most critically, when these layers appropriately target drivers who may be “at-risk” of becoming involved in a collision, there is a greater opportunity for a “compassionate intervention” by management that could prevent a collision with it’s potential for injuries or death.
The authors who’ve published the “high level overview” of fleet safety programs are brilliant professionals with many years of experience — I don’t doubt their knowledge, ability, experience or caring; however, I wonder why we keep seeing so many of the “same” articles that go on for pages about pre-qualification and on-boarding.
If the average tenure of a driver was under a month or two, it would make sense to constantly be replacing and training drivers as your primary day-to-day safety activity, but we know that’s not reality (or shouldn’t be).
Sure there’s turnover, but what are safety managers doing in between that initial driver training class and the next accident investigation?
It seems to me that if a realistic “driver management” program were in place (as suggested by ANSI Z15 and illustrated by the multi-layer program, above), then the safety manager would spend much of his/her time working that program to PREVENT collisions, injuries and moving violations.
Summary
Drivers are bright, caring people doing a difficult job in most circumstances. Likewise, safety managers genuinely care about helping drivers be safe. We need to be vigilant in all areas of our driver safety programs to be effective.
The missing bridge between effective driver qualification and minimized crash events is an effective driver management program! Layering multiple data inputs and washing them through a database to deliver “tip of the iceberg” conclusions helps managers focus their time and energy on those drivers who need the most urgent attention on specific topics. As you re-evaluate your current program, look for gaps in developing key data that would be useful in helping zero-in on select drivers for meaningful coaching interventions.
Similarly, ensure that your front line supervisors are versed in conducting positive coaching sessions designed to illustrate the cooperative nature of safety teamwork — drivers and managers working together to be safe instead of playing the “blame game”.
Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) or “self-driving cars” incorporate a lot of high tech and cutting edge technology in order to be able to drive down the road in a safe and predictable manner.
A recent artticle at “Tech Page One” (Link HERE) did a great job summarizing key safety features of AVs and included a wonderful “infographic” as well.
Here is a short list of several features:
LIDAR, and acronym for Light Detection and Ranging, uses sensors to collect data about the position of the AV in relationship to other, nearby, objects. From the article; “A LIDAR device consists of a laser, a scanner and a specialized GPS receiver…Typically, airplanes and helicopters use this technology because it’s known for precision and accuracy in mapping nearby targets. In driverless cars, LIDAR automatically controls the steering, power delivery and braking…”
Adaptive cruise control & brake assist are two functions that help AVs control their speed as they go up and down hills, around curves, enter into areas of congestion (stopped traffic) and such. Emergency brake assist is used when the AV is in danger of hitting a stopped object, or if it is overtaking another object too quickly.
Specialized cameras help AVs to recognize pedestrians and cyclists in real time so that the computer can adjust speed or travel path as needed.
Preloaded, detailed mapping helps the AV know where it is located in relationship to buildings, roads, and other fixed objects.
When dealing with a ‘ton of data’ about crashes, causes, contributing factors, costs and such, it can take several years to fully value and understand what it all means. Why?
First, there’s a lot to analyze.
Second, not all final crash costs are known until the bulk of medical treatments have been completed and reported.
Third, data about the source data becomes available during the analysis process (we gain insights as the analysis proceeds — sometimes causing us to reverse and re-examine details).
We wanted to share some select quotes from the study to highlight several key findings.
In 2010, there were 32,999 people killed, 3.9 million were injured, and 24 million vehicles were damaged in motor vehicle crashes in the United States. The economic costs of these crashes totaled $277 billion. Included in these losses are lost productivity, medical costs, legal and court costs, emergency service costs (EMS), insurance administration costs, congestion costs, property damage, and workplace losses. The $277 billion cost of motor vehicle crashes represents the equivalent of nearly $897 for each of the 308.7 million people living in the United States, and 1.9 percent of the $14.96 trillion real U.S. Gross Domestic Product for 2010. These figures include both police-reported and unreported crashes. When quality of life valuations are considered, the total value of societal harm from motor vehicle crashes in 2010 was $871 billion. Lost market and household productivity accounted for $93 billion of the total $277 billion economic costs, while property damage accounted for $76 billion. Medical expenses totaled $35 billion. Congestion caused by crashes, including travel delay, excess fuel consumption, greenhouse gases and criteria pollutants accounted for $28 billion. Each fatality resulted in an average discounted lifetime cost of $1.4 million. Public revenues paid for roughly 9 percent of all motor vehicle crash costs, costing tax payers $24 billion in 2010, the equivalent of over $200 in added taxes for every household in the United States.
Clearly, traffic crashes cost a lot of money!
Key contributing factors to the crash data in 2010 included:
Impaired (drunk) driving
Speed
Distraction
Seat belts saved many, but some (3,350 people) perished for failing to use their restraints properly/consistently
It is staggering to realize that during 2010, there were more than 3.9 million people injured in 13.6 million motor vehicle crashes (including about 33,000 fatalities). Alcohol-involved crashes accounted for about 21 percent of all crash costs and a third of all road deaths.
Speed-related crashes (where at least one driver was exceeding the posted limit OR driving too fast for conditions) were connected to 10,536 fatalities (another third of the total for the year).
So, in hindsight, if all drivers had:
worn their seatbelts properly,
avoided driving while impaired and
followed the speed limit (or driven with regard to local conditions)
then, about two-thirds of all road deaths could have been avoided (22,000 lives saved).
The opening paragraph of the study that deals with speeding says a lot in a few words:
Excess speed can contribute to both the frequency and severity of motor vehicle crashes. At higher speeds, additional time is required to stop a vehicle and more distance is traveled before corrective maneuvers can be implemented. Speeding reduces a driver’s ability to react to emergencies created by driver inattention; by unsafe maneuvers of other vehicles; by roadway hazards; by vehicle system failures (such as tire blowouts); or by hazardous weather conditions. The fact that a vehicle was exceeding the speed limit does not necessarily mean that this was the cause of the crash, but the probability of avoiding the crash would likely be greater had the driver or drivers been traveling at slower speeds. A speed-related crash is defined as any crash in which the police indicate that one or more drivers involved was exceeding the posted speed limit, driving too fast for conditions, driving at a speed greater than reasonable or prudent, exceeding a special speed limit or zone, or racing.
In short, speeding robs you of needed reaction time – you need to make judgments faster and have less room to maneuver in an emergency. Each of us can choose to drive slower and buy time to react and respond, but we’re often in a ‘hurry’ to get to our destination, and choose to increase or risk.
The study reminded us of the urgent need for ALL drivers of cars, trucks, buses to properly use restraints such as seatbelts whenever driving. Consider these statistics:
When properly fastened, seat belts provide significant protection to vehicle occupants involved in a crash. The simple act of buckling a seat belt can improve an occupant’s chance of surviving a potentially fatal crash by from 44 to 73 percent, depending on the type of vehicle and seating position involved. They are also highly effective against serious nonfatal injuries. Belts reduce the chance of receiving an MAIS 2-5 injury (moderate to critical) by 49 to 78 percent.
The report did not have kind words for the use of motorcycles (however, I could speculate that the authors were concerned for the welfare of riders in delivering their findings in a stark way):
Motorcycles are the most hazardous form of motor vehicle transportation. The lack of external protection provided by vehicle structure, the lack of internal protection provided by seat belts and air bags, their speed capability, the propensity for riders to become airborne through ejection, and the relative instability inherent with riding a two-wheeled vehicle all contribute to making the motorcycle the most risky passenger vehicle. In 2010, 4,518 motorcyclists were killed and 96,000 were injured in police-reported crashes on our Nation’s roadways. This represents 14 percent of all traffic fatalities and 3 percent of all police-reported injuries. Motorcycles accounted for only 0.6 percent of all vehicle miles traveled in 2010. Per vehicle mile traveled in 2010, a motorcyclist was about 30 times more likely than a passenger car occupant to die in a motor vehicle traffic crash and 5 times more likely to be injured. The difference in these proportions reflects the more severe injury profile that results from motorcycle crashes. Over the past several decades motorcycle fatalities and injuries have generally increased relative to those in other vehicle types.
Other observations included a good reminder that intersections continue to be a prime location for crashes since there are so many ways that vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists can interact with each other during turns or even while transiting the intersection (straight across).
SUMMARY
While the data summarizes activity from 2010, we can learn a lot about behavior, choices and safety results. There’s never an inappropriate time to share safety messages with drivers about obeying traffic laws, using seatbelts and avoiding risk taking (i.e. driving while impaired, distracted driving, etc.)
New York City has embraced a traffic safety plan called “Vision Zero”. This program aims to materially improve safety results through targeted education and enforcement. From their website (click HERE):
…approximately 4,000 New Yorkers are seriously injured and more than 250 are killed each year in traffic crashes. Being struck by a vehicle is the leading cause of injury-related death for children under 14, and the second leading cause for seniors. On average, vehicles seriously injure or kill a New Yorker every two hours.
This status quo is unacceptable. The City of New York must no longer regard traffic crashes as mere “accidents,” but rather as preventable incidents that can be systematically addressed. No level of fatality on city streets is inevitable or acceptable. This Vision Zero Action Plan is the City’s foundation for ending traffic deaths and injuries on our streets.
One of the tools introduced to help school children improve their knowledge of how to cross streets safely is a video presentation with a catchy tune and lyrics that emphasize good techniques. Here’s the video:
The Vision Zero web page wisely states; “There is no silver bullet that will end traffic fatalities. But previous successes that have combined the efforts of people, their governments and private industries to save lives are not difficult to find.” We agree.
Traffic safety (pedestrians, cars, trucks, buses, cyclists, et.al.) all share a responsibility to interact with each other in a respectful and responsible manner. We each have a role to play in preventing collisions by obeying rules and learning how to better practice safe techniques.
A colleague sent me a link to an odd, funny and “catchy” video (embedded below) that features a pair of rappers who are trying to make a point to “the younger generation” of drivers:
…you may think that you’re an expert at texting while driving (a “textpert”), but you’re kidding yourself that your actions are somehow safe…
Take three minutes to watch the video below. For some of us it may appear “silly” but if educational efforts make any impact on changing behavior in our teen and young adult drivers, I’m all for it.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety recently published a Status Update titled “Searching for answers on distraction.”
Safety Is My Goal's Blog 