I don't want to prolong this discussion because it's very much OT, but I'd point out that, unlike car drivers (and that shouldn't excuse car drivers), truck and taxi drivers are doing it as a *profession* yet don't meet the same standards as bus, tram, train drivers, plane pilots or master mariners. The expectations should be consistent across the board.

Also if you drive in Europe you'll witness the effects of a proper regulatory and enforcement regime applied to truck drivers, a regime that's very diluted here. They can still be idiots like the one at Studenka but rest assured they are very severely dealt with, unlike the one at Kerang who *admitted* to driving towards the crossing at 100 km/h in *cruise control* and seeing cars stopped at the other side of the crossing, yet was let off because of a prevailing culture of sympathy towards motor vehicle drivers.

The most significant point is that trucks are a very deadly implement which means a high degree of control needs to be enforced. Just one example of European enforement is that they're restricted to 90 km/h, even on journeys longer than typical Australian ones.

At least one thing I've learnt from this discussion is that apparently a late-running PT vehicle can *cause* an accident. Also I don't think the prospect of boosting the community-workforce is a justification for killing or being in a position to kill people.

Tony P

---InTramsDownUnder@..., <matthew@...> wrote :

Truck AND taxi drivers are often maligned in many forums. My general impression from being a (more occasional, not regular, bicycle rider, and when I do drive I'm towing a 7m trailer with a boat on it), is most of the general population shouldn't be allowed behind the wheel. I'd include my self in that on the basis of low hours behind the wheel. If I was a train/tram driver or a pilot my competency would get revoked for low hrs.

Track and Taxi drivers however spend MANY more hours on the road than 'normal' people, and particularly in the case of truck drivers, have schedules to adhere too. It's the schedule thing that probably pushes truck drivers to more than average take risks.

And a truck that makes a regular trip is probably more at risk - the driver knows the route and sort of switches to 'autopilot' and doesn't react very well when something out of the ordinary happens.

It may be a hard life being a truckie, but that's no excuse for inattention that claims lives. And in a small way we are ALL responsible for expecting such a quick and apparently efficient goods supply chain, the pressure on those truck drivers to deliver consistently on time and at low low pay rates doesn't come from no where...

I have an uncle who used to owner-drive a coal haul truck doing a mine to power station run in the lower hunter (he eventually found another, less stressful career)- at one point he was trying very hard to convince my aunt to get a HC license, so when he was at home resting she could take the truck and keep it earning. He was paid by the load, not hours.....)

I've also seen more than one comment saying that driving offenses are dealt with lightly by the courts in Australia, all the defendant has to argue is revoking their license will cause extreme personal hardship as they won't be able to work/get to work, and the Judges/jury go light. They all drive and think about how difficult their own personal situation would be if their license was revoked, so the argument carries weight.

One side effect that has done some good on the tram preservation front - Loftus gets a lot of work done by tradies doing 'community service'. A number of them are doing time for DUI offenses, but as a tradie that needs to carry tools to work, they have dodged a license suspension and got community service instead and then were assigned to Loftus to do their hours. It's a fair amount of 'work' for the museum though as not only do they need to be relatively closely supervised, suitable work needs to be found for them to do.