J! All , « \ “.3 .. p. . . ‘. . ,g‘lln. likivi..n. . . - -r- ..\ a 3.2. ‘41Jn.N«Ai-1~?avdflJfilvliiau|!?.lt I I I THE RELATIONSHIP OF FLEET SAFETY PROGRAMS TO ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES IN SELECTED CITY DELIVERY FLEETS by welter D. weiea AN ABSTRACT Submitted to Michi an State University in partial ful illment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Police Administration and Public Safety 1966 APPROVED.§%§2§aEmun=JL’ (r’iggégzaég.___' a n V ' .zfiiV“ em er m Rbeéflw, ABSTRACT THE RELATIONSHIP OF FLEET SAFETY PROGRAMS T0 ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES IN SELECTED CITY DELIVERY FLEETS by Walter D. Weiss For more than three decades fleet safety programs have been employed by motor vehicle fleets throughout the United States. These programs are based on the premise that most vehicular accidents result from human failures; failures that can be reduced to a minimum through, among other things, fleet safety program activity. The major purpose of fleet safety programs is to prevent accidents under routine conditions. In police fleets most accidents occur under routine patrol conditions, when they can best be prevented. Thus, fleet accident prevention takes on importance to the police administrator in operating an efficient department. Reduced accident experience in police fleets: (l) lowers the cost of fleet operation;. . (2) helps to maintain man-power at peak strength; and (3) assists the police administrator in building good public relations. Safety administrators have put a great deal of faith in the ability of fleet safety programs to favorably affect. the accident experience of their drivers. 7 A search of the available literature on fleet safety Walter D. Weiss programs revealed studies that point up definite reductions in company accident frequency rates. These studies conclude that these reductions result, at least partially, from fleet safety program activity. No comparative studies were found in the literature that revealed the trend of accident experi- ence in companies with similar exposure but contrasting fleet safety programs. The author hypothesizes that there is no difference in the trends of accident frequency rates in motor vehicle fleets employing standard fleet safety programs and fleets employing sub-standard programs. A study was designed to test this hypothesis since no data was found in the literature that either support or reject the hypothesis. A relatively homogeneous group of wholesale bakeries in Detroit, Michigan serves as the population in this study. A questionnaire was used to survey these companies in an effort to gather data on each of their: (1) delivery opera- tions; (2) driver selection procedures; (3) accident preven- tion activities; (A) maintenance policies; and (5) mileage and accident experience. These data were used in'a comparison of accident frequency rate trends of companies with standard fleet safety programs and companies with sub-standard programs. walter D. Weiss In all but one of the comparisons, a difference in frequency rate trends occurred in companies with standard fleet safety programs as contrasted to those using sub- standard programs. Since an exception existed, the author felt it could not be concluded that the data either support or reject the hypothesis. Data from the study show, however, that in each case ‘where a standard fleet safety program was in effect, each of the companies experienced a reduction in their accident frequency rate trend. I Because of the large number of variables involved in any study outside a controlled environment, this study being no exception, a great deal of additional research is needed to provide information on the relationship of the variety of factors that might influence accident frequency rate trends in motor vehicle fleets. THE RELATIONSHIP OF FLEET SAFETY PROGRAMS To ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES IN SELECTED CITY DELIVERY FLEETS By ‘Walter D. Weiss ' A THESIS Submitted to IMichigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Police Administration and Public Safety 1966 Copyright by WALTER D. WEISS 1966 ' ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank all the wholesale bakeries in Detroit who were most cooperative in furnishing the data for this study. Also, I wish to express my appreciation to Mr. Raymond T. Galvin for his suggestions and guidance in the writing of this paper. A special note of thanks is made to Mr. Alfred A. Brokop ‘who carefully edited rough and preliminary drafts for English construction and thought continuity. A special expression of appreciation is extended to the National Safety Council whose research grant helped immeasurably in defraying the cost of this study and to the National Automobile Transporters Association who granted me time off during working hours to gather the data for the study. ‘ My special thanks to my wife Juli who gave me a great deal of encouragement, support and help throughout the study. 11 CHAPTER I. III. TABLE OF CONTENTS THE PROBLEA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . tatement of the problem . . . Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . Methodology . . . . . . . . . . Limitations of the study . . . Importance of the Study . . . . . . Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . Standard fleet safety program . Sub-standard fleet safety program No fleet safety prOgram . . . . Defensive driving . . . . . . . Accident. . . . . . . . . . . . Preventable accident . . . . . Reportable accident . . . . . . Minimum maintenance . . . . . . Fleet . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency rate . . . . . . . . Organization of Remainder of Thesis REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii PAGE. mamWPp-H 12 12 15 16 16 l6 l6 l7 l7 l7 17 18 19 33 CHAPTER PAGE ' III. THE SURVEY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Development of the Fleet Safety Program Activity Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . 36 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 'Selection of drivers . . . . . . . . . . 37 Accident prevention programing . . . . . 38 Vehicle maintenance . . . . . . . . . . 38 Accident and mileage data . . . . . . . 38 Testing the Initial Questionnaire . . . . . 39 Source of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4O Variables Involved . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Exposure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Environmental elements . . . . . . . 42 Exposure based on number of miles operated . . . . . . . .,. . . . . 42 Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Selection of drivers . . . . . . . . . . 43 Training of drivers . . . . . . . . . . I 43 Type of operation . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Method of Conducting the Survey . . . .'. . 44 Phase I - Initial contact . . . . . . . 44 Phase II - The survey . . . . . . . . . 45 Phase III - Follow-up . . . . . . . . . 45 iv CHAPTER IV. SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS OF DATA Group 1 . . . . . . . . Operations . . . . . Selection of drivers Maintenance . . . . Frequency rate . . . Company 3 . . . Company 4 . . . Company l3 . . . Company 16 . . . Company 17 . . . Company 19 . . . Group 2 ..I. .'. . . . . Operations . . . . . Selection of drivers Maintenance . . . . Frequency rate . . . Company 6 . . . Company 8 . . . Company 12 . . . Group 3 . . . . . . . . Operations . . . . . 'Selection of drivers Maintenance . . . . 46 48 48 49 50 50 52 52 53 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 59 6O 6O 61 61 62 63' U CHAPTK t. Frequency rate Company 5 Company 9 Company 10 Company 11 Company 14 V. CONCLUSIONS AND NEED FOR Conclusions . . .' Group 1 . . . Discussion Group 2 . . . Discussion Group 3 . . . Discussion Summary . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX A. APPENDIX B. WEND IX C. APPENDIX D. Questionnaire vi TV I" Need For Further Research URTHER Fleet Safety Program Activity Summary of Questionnaire Data Questionnaire Response Tables Sample Letters Used in Study . PAG 64 64 66 67 68 69 7O 7O 7O 7O 71 71 72 72 73 74' 78 85 96 99 138 E LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. Group 1 - Accident Frequency Rate Chart . . . . . 51 2. Group 2 - Accident Frequency Rate Chart . . . . . 58 3. Group 3 - Accident Frequency Rate Chart . . . . . 65 vii CHAPTER I I THE PROBLEM At the onset of the motor vehicle era, accidents were regarded as strictly chance happenings due to bad luck. ACCidents were called wrecks and if one occurred, the after effects were cleared away and it was hoped it I would not happen again. As the motor vehicle began to take on more gprdminence in the AmeriCan way of life and their numbers . increased, laws and ordinances were developed as a means of keeping these vehicles from running into each other as well as into pedestrians and fixed objects. This- resulted in a substantialcontribution to accident preven- tion and a change in the motorist's concept of accident involvement. Traffic laws and ordinances directed the ‘driver's attention toward determining whether one of these regulations had been violated. Thus, he attempted to ~establish legal blame in accident situations. Commercial vehicle fleet safety directors realised -that even though their drivers obeyed traffic laws and regulations, they were still being involved in accidents. They looked beyond legal fault in accident situations to try to develop means, in addition to obedience to traffic laws, by which accidents could be prevented.1 The search for an answer to the accident problem brought about the fleet safety program which has as its major purpose the preventiOn of accidents. For more than three decades2 accident prevention activities have been employed by motor vehicle fleets throughout the United States. The National Safety Council and the American Trucking Associations, Inc., among others, have served as clearing houses for ideas on how to prevent vehicular accidents. These ideas evolved into fleet safety programs which are currently in use by their respective members. In addition, a number of companies have designed their own programs to fit the peculiarities of their particular type of fleet operations. Today, safety administrators generally agree that the great majority of traffic accidents result from human 1 Chris Imhoff, Better Driving Is Better Business (Chicago, Illinois: National Safety—CCEHEIIT I§SETT-Ep. 4-6. National Safety Congress - TransactionsJ Historical copies of these publications described fleet safety programs in use prior to 1934. (Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council . ‘ .J I , 1 “4 IA v‘v VS. a" V‘. ‘~ '1 “a failures, failures on the part of drivers to adjust their driving to mental, physical and environmental conditions. The National Safety Council booklet, ACCIDENT FACTS states that improper driving is a contributing element in over 90 per cent of all motor vehicle accidents.3 Human failures might stem from a variety of factors. For example, a driver may be unable to adjust his driving to his environment due to his physical qualities or characteristics. Selection procedures have been developed by the transportation industry to reduce this problem to a minimum. Driver failures might also stem from an individual's lack of knowledge in how to adjust his driving to his environment. Likewise, human failures in driving can occur when the knowledgeable driver is unwilling to adjust his driving to the environment. Considerable information is available that describes fleet safety prOgrams and how they have been used t0'try to reduce human failures in an effort to prevent vehicular accidents. Accident Facts, 1965 Edition, (Chicago, Illinois: NationaI Safety Council, 1965), p. 48. Many companies have, in fact, stated that a fleet safety program has played a role in reducing their motor vehicle accident frequency rate. Following an internal evaluation of their safety program, a number of companies have pointed out definite reductions in their accident frequency rates and have concluded that the reductions are a result, at least partially, of their fleet safety program. I. THE PROBLEM tatement of the Problem. Although definite reductions in accident frequency rates have been attributed to fleet safety program activity, no study is known to have pre- sented comparative data that shows the trend of accident experience in companies with similar exposure but differing fleet safety programs or no program whatsoever. The purpose of this study is to compile information about companies operating fleets of motor vehicles that have similar exposure but differing fleet safety prOgrams in order to: (1) determine whether there is a difference in the trends of accident frequency rates in fleets employing standard fleet safety programs and See Definitions, "Standard Fleet Safety Program" 5 fleets employing sub-standard programs; (2) determine whether there is a difference in accident frequency rates in fleets that have a fleet safety program and those that have no program; and (3) establish whether the use of a fleet safety program consistently results in reduced accident frequency rates. Hypothesis. There is no difference in the trends of accident frequency rates in motor vehicle fleets employing standard fleet safety programs, as defined, and fleets employing sub-standard programs, as defined. It is also conjectured that available literature is neither sufficiently objective nor sufficiently complete to either support or contradict the hypothesis. Methodology. In order to establish what a fleet safety program involves, a search of available literature 5 was conducted for descriptions of fleet safety program activities. Also, available literature was scrutinized for research conducted on the relationship of fleet safety programs to accident trends. See Definitions, "Sub-standard Fleet Safety Program" 6 The four elements described by the National Safety Council as being basic to effective fleet safety activity were used to define a standard fleet safety program. A questionnaire was developed using the standard fleet safety program as a frame of reference. Through the use of this questionnaire, a survey of current operations and fleet safety program activities in selected city delivery fleets was conducted. The findings are included in the study. An analysis of the data obtained through the question- naire coupled with the review of literature was used to test the hypothesis. Limitations 2f the Studv. The universe for this study includes all wholesale bakeries operating within the Detroit metropolitan area, including suburbs. A list of these bakeries was acquired from the Michigan Bell Telephone Yellow Pages Directory for Detroit. The population used for this study is limited to those wholesale bakeries which operated a fleet of motor vehicles as defined, i.e., ten or more delivery trucks. No attempt is made to evaluate specific parts of standard or sub-standard fleet safety programs and the individual relationships of these parts to the various 6 Chris Imhoff, Better Driving Is Better Business (Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, I964), p. 4. companies' accident frequency rates. An evaluation of this type would require the manipulation of company fleet safety program activities and policies over a number of years along with subsequent comparisons of accident trends. This type of evaluation is behond the scope of this study. This study, likewise, does not attempt to evaluate the relationship between differences in the application of the specific parts of standard or sub-standard fleet safety programs and the companies' accident frequency rates. Such an evaluation is also beyond the scope of this study. Environmental elements were assumed to work equally on all subjects since all the fleets that cooperated in this study operated within the Detroit metropolitan area, including suburbs, during the period of time involved in the investigation. Therefore, the effects of road, weather, road-side environment, location, traffic, light conditions, time of day or week, etc., will be considered negligible variables. An attempt was made to resolve variables such aS' types of equipment used, employment practices, maintenance programs, size of fleet, etc., by matching fleets with Similar equipment and policies. II. IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY The question of the relationship between fleet safety programs and accident experience in motor vehicle fleets has been subjected to considerable study. However, the objectiveness and completeness of these studies is questionable if the published literature is any criterion. Safety administrators have put a great deal of faith in the ability of fleet safety program activity to favorably affect the accident experience of their drivers.. A. R. Hoenniger, Safety Officer, San Diego County, California, stated that: "Proper preliminary training and a continuous safety program are necessary elements of any realistic approach to prevention of traffic collisions involv- ing police drivers and vehicles." Gerald O'Connell, Assistant Director, Traffic Institute, Northwestern University, also stated that: "Success in preventing police vehicle accidents requires participation by every division, and active support by all command and supervisory personnel for requirements of the (fleet safety) program." A. R. Hoenniger, "Police Fleet Safety," Traffic Digest and Review, March, 1962, p. 10. 8 Gerald O'Connell, "Safety Program Tops Operating Policies For Police Fleets," Traffic Digest and Review, February, 1963, p. 8. It is important, then, that an objective attempt be made to evaluate the relationship between fleet safety programs and fleet accident experience in an effort to substantiate the faith put in fleet safety programs. While police fleets are not specifically involved in this study, their basic accident problems are substantially the same as any other fleet operation, including wholesale bakery fleets. Although operating a police vehicle is unique in some respects, accidents occur in police fleets due to human failures much like in any other fleet. Emergency operation of police vehicles places law enforcement officers in positions not encountered by most other drivers. Often they must exceed the speed limit, abridge right-of-way regulations, and take other risks when on emergency runs; and usually in city traffic where driving conditions are most congested. It would seem, then, that a police officer pursuing a fleeing car would have little time to think about the refinements of safe driving. Accident involvement under these conditions would not seem too surprising. However, contrary to popular belief, high speed pursuit or the emergency run are not the principle factors in accidents involving police vehicles. One police agency 10 reported that during a twelve-month period, approximately 78 per cent of its accidents occurred during routine patrol duty, and only 22 per cent during emergency or pursuit driving. 5 Another police department reported over 84 per cent of all moving accidents occurred during rmitine patrol.lO A survey conducted by the Highway Safety Division of the International Association of Chiefs of Police in 1962 found that approximately 90 per cent of reported police accidents occurred during routine patrol or when the vehicle was parked.11 Not taken into consideration in these figures is the ratio of routine patrol miles to pursuit or emergency-run miles driven. Were these facts known, it might show that accidents occurring during pursuit driving or emergency runs are proportionately higher to the miles driven during pursuit than those occurring during routine patrol. Paul H. Coburn, "For Safer Police Drivers," Traffic Digest and Review, October, 1953, p. 14. 10 Figures obtained from the City of Dallas Police Department, Dallas, Texas, in a letter dated April, 1965. ll . "Safe Driving Techniques," Training Key fl 20, Field Service Division, International Association of hiefs of Police, 1319 18th St., N.w., Washington, D. C. 10026, 1964. u I -q. 319' ,NAC» (I . “guts r I JdV‘D- a t -. I 'J“‘\. \‘~ . 11 However, the fact remains that most accidents do occur on routine patrol when they can best be prevented. most police vehicle collisions, however, occur during normal patrol operations and not during pursuit. The sudden erratic movement of another vehicle or the momen- tary distraction of the patrol driver while cruising can bring about collisions in much the same way as accidents occur to John or Jane Doe.1 The importance of fleet accident prevention to the police administrator is three fold. First, reduced accident experience lowers the cost of fleet operation through lower insurance premiums, less vehicle repair and.fewer man-hours wasted. Second, reduced accident experience helps to maintain present man-power at peak strength by preventing: a. Loss of personnel due to injury b. Loss of efficiency because of inexperienced personnel replacing experienced men c. Man-power loss due to investigating accidents-‘ involving department vehicles and personnel. 12 A. C. Finch, "Police Fleets Need Safety Too," The M Chief, November, 1956, p. 1,1, plo.-' — CVVUV. "h‘w- -‘ H‘ .4 Us \- l u] A \ AA! a . “VuVfi ‘thlh. ~.c V 12 Finally, reduced accident experience helps to build better public relations and helps to establish police personnel and police departments as leaders in accident prevention in the community. Lt. V. K. Hipskind of the Dallas Police Department, concluded in one of his many articles in police journals that, "A definite safety program is necessary for the efficient and economical operation of a police department."13 Fleet safety programs are usually designed to prevent accidents under routine driving conditions. Thus, the police administrator may be in a position to reduce his accident frequency rate by using the techniques of fleet safety programming found in private transportation concerns. III. DEFINITION OF TERMS Certain terms are defined in order to make this study more meaningful. These terms and definitions follow. STANDARD FLEET SAFETY PROGRAQ For purposes of this study, a standard fleet safety 13 .V. K. Hipskind, "The Development of a Police Safety Program," Police, January-February, 1965, p. 63. 13 program contains four elements the National Safety Council calls essential for effective fleet safety activity. These elements are: l. A standard of driving performance 2. Driver training 3. Record keeping on individual drivers' performances 4. Recognition for good driving performancel’+ An outline of a standard fleet safety program model might include the following: ELEMENT 1. Standard of Driving Performance An example of a standard of driving performance is: Driving with the objective of preventing accidents through the continuous exercise of every resource of alertness, foresight, knowledge, judgement, and skill necessary to avoid preventable accidents. ELEMENT 2; Driver Training The following are examples of methods and materials that might be employed in driver training. 14 Chris Imhoffé Better Drifl Is Better Business Chicago Illinois: National 8a ety om ciI, 1 $4, p. ' a. b. 14 Methods of Training Examples: 1. Initial indoctrination 2. On-the-job instruction (behind-the-wheel) 3. Check-rides and inspections 4. Safety meetings a. Lectures b. Demonstrations- including use of films 5. Bulletin boards - posting accident prevention 5 information 6. Mail safety material to home Materials and Publications used in training that contain safe driving information Examples: 1. Driver magazine (containing defensive driving .and safety information) Driver letter (containing defensive driving and safety information) Booklets ( containing defensive driving and safety information) Safety posters . a. In terminal building b. In vehicle III! r14 l5 5. Bulletins (containing safety information) 6. Motion pictures 7. Slide shows ELEMENT__3. Record Keeping c. d. 6. This element includes: Definition of an accident Definition of a reportable accident Definition of a preventable accident A policy requiring g1; accidents to be reported A systematic record of the individual driving performance of each driver ELEMENT 4. Recognition a. b. Recognition based on a standard of performance (See Element 1) Well defined rules describing the standard of reCOgnition Forms of recognition 1. Safe driver awards (pins, emblems, certificates, etc.). 2. Cash or merchandise bonuses 3. Incentives of many different types and values (vacation trips, letter of commendation, etc.) MANDARD FLEET SAFETY PROGRAlvi A program that contains less than all of the four basic elements of a standard fleet safety program. 16 NO FLEET SAFETY PROGRAM. ‘ A motor vehicle fleet program that fails to employ any of the four basic elements of a standard fleet safety program. DEFENSIVE DRIVING Driving so as to commit no driving errors and to avoid accidents that could result from the actions of other drivers or adverse conditions. ACCIDENT Any occurrence involving a fleet motor vehicle in which there was death, injury, or porperty damage.15 BREVENTABLE ACCIDENT (For Individual Drivers) Any occurrence involving a motor vehicle in which there was death, injury or property damage, where the driver in question failed to do everything he reasonably could have done to prevent the accident.16 ‘ IS ' Safe Driver Award Rules, (Chicago, Illinois: National Safety CounciI, January, 1955), p. 2. 16 Ibid., p. 3. .quqa—g. -- .u- -t q “kahuna-Z I V“ The . “A“. o CEDM‘VS E‘AH_ “‘y' :4. dye. V! - a: '80 'h' --n- ..,_V -, I “‘i‘ Q. Asu'. ,' "1 \‘finOist o ‘8 F * l7 REPORTABLE ACCIDENT Any occurrence involving a fleet motor vehicle which results in death, injury, or property damage, unless such fleet vehicle is properly parked. Who was injured, what property was damaged or to what extent, where it occurred, or who was responsible is not a factor.17 MINIMUM MAINTENANCE Regular schedule of servicing and checking a vehicle to help prevent vehicle defects that might result in vehicle accidents. FLEET Ten or more vehicles of a single type (bus, truck or Passenger car) comprising identical motor transportation oPerations. EREQUENCY RATE - 19 Reportable accidents per million vehicle viles F R _ Reportable Accidents. R 1,000,000 IVéhicleINiIes ' ' 17 Contest Rules, National Fleet Safety Contest. (Chicago, Illincue¢ National Safety CounciI, revised July I, 1964). p. l. 18 Ibid., p. l. 19 , Ibid., pp. 4 and 5. 18 IV. ORGANIZATION OF REMAINDER OF THESIS A review and analysis of the literature on accident prevention and fleet safety programing are presented in Chapter II. Chapter III relates the method used to gather fleet safety program and accident experience data. Details outlining the development of the questionnaire used in the survey, the source of the data collected, and variables involved are also included in this chapter. Chapter IV reviews and analyzes the data collected in the survey. Conclusions drawn from the analysis of the survey ' data are presented in Chapter V. Finally, the need for further research is discussed. 19 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE A search for the available literature on fleet safety programs was conducted at the National Safety Council Library, Chicago, Illinois; Michigan State University Traffic Library, East Lansing, Michigan; and the Northwestern mniversity Transportatidn Library, Evanston, Illinois. In addition, inquiries were sent to: O 1. New York University, Center for Safety Education, New York, New York 2. University of California at Los Angeles, Institute of Transportation and Traffic Engineering, Los Angeles, California 3. University of Illinois, Highway Traffic Safety Center, Urbana, Illinois 4» Pennsylvania State University, Institute of Public Safety, University Park, Pennsylvania :5. U} S. Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents, washington, D. 0.20 Most of the material obtained was of a descriptive 2RD th . £3ee Appendix B for sample letter number 1 used in e mquiry to the latter 5 organizations. p:.uo‘ ‘ .mvu. II '«n-4 v “Lb‘h6011 .:. ,; UéV “. ’- D. "I ‘“ ‘ W‘e Ud 4 "'f‘ n“ enrusu‘l '~" ": LUu‘E A. s” ~“"W “‘ 6‘55“: “Y'H‘ n y; Gun “.9 V. ‘h‘CEDI '5 20 nature presenting brief outlines of safety programs or simply stating that a fleet safety program was in effect. Accident and accident frequency rate reductions were also cited. Literature describing comparative data that exhibits the trend of accident experience in companies with similar exposure but differing fleet safety programs appears to be nonpexistent. However, literature describing fleet safety programs and improvement in accident experience are numerous and are reviewed in the selected materials presented in this chapter. Major General Paul F. Yount, in his talk before the 15155 National Safety Congress, Commercial Vehicle Section, rerxorted a reduction of the Army Transportation Corps' accxident frequency rate from 2.6 to 1.4 accidents per lOC},OOO vehicle miles between l9h6 and l95h. He credits 21 ' this reduction to a number of factors. Specific safety objectives, teamwork, strong command support, able technical advisors, and making safety the responsi- bility.of every commander are the ZI I P P. F. Yount,” "The-Army Transportation Corps Safety rngqam’n National Safety Congress - Transactions$ Vol. 1, , p. 19. (Fhicago, IlIinois: National: Safety Council, 1955 21 22 essential factors of our program. A 63 per cent decrease in the number of persons killed between l9h6 and 1954 in accidents involving buses operated by interstate carriers who reported to the Interstate Commerce Commission was attributed to the use of fleet safety programs according to Harold Hosea, Directorzgf Research, National Association of Motor Bus Owners. Mr. Hosea cited some of the ingredients in the programs employed by these companies operating buses interstate and cited as most important driver selection and training . Most of the carriers, especially the larger companies, have set up minimum physical and psychological hiring standards considerably more rigorous than required by 1.0.0. safety regulations. A great deal of emphasis is put on the aptitude and personality charac- teristics of driver applicants.2h Considerable emphasis was also placed on vehicle inspection and maintenance by Mr. Hosea. g Ibid. 23 Harold R. Hosea, "Safety Programs Pay Off In Intercity Bus Operations." Public Safety, March, 1956, p. 17. Ibid. 22 At the 1954 National Safety Congress motor Transport- ation Conference, Carlton Alexander, then Director of Safety, Mclean Trucking Company, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, outlined, among other things, in-service train- ing in his company. According to Mr. Alexander, the purpose of driver training in his company was three-fold: (1) To develop skill in the driver enabling him to maneuver the vehicle in a safe manner. (2) To develop the necessary amount of knowledge to permit the driver, to operate the vehicle. (3) To instill proper attitudes so the driver utilizes his acquired skill and knowledge in performing the operation of safe driving. In his presentation, he cited principles of driver training and‘made suggestions as to what type person or employee might make good trainers. Although the subject matter to be taught was not covered, tools that, could be useci in in-service training were mentioned, as follows: (1) 'bulletins; (2) letters; (3) posters; (A) cartoons;- (5) Iiouse organs; and (6) others. Job analysis, accident analqrsis, and training records were suggested as those factors that should give direction to the use of these tools. 23 He also pointed out other devices which, although their primary function is not training, could have a secondary value as a training tool: (1) award programs; (2) accident review committee; (3) safety committees; and (h) supervisory techniques. Mr. Alexander reported a study involving 52 McLean drivers in which some of these in-service training devices were used. In addition to two weeks of recruit training, each of the 52 drivers received one week of in-service training and a three day refresher or second imp-service training course. This training was conducted over-a three year period and a before and after study sh owed the following: (1) Before In-Service Training - 114,791 miles per accident (2) After In-Service Training - 252,000 miles per accident (3) After Second In-Service Training - 330,000 miles per accident. The miles per accident operated by the 52 drivers furixyg the periods before and after training were reported ‘— 25 Carlton Alexander, "Evaluating Progress Through In- SerVixze Driver Training," National Safety Congress - Chicago, IIIinois: National Safety Tgansactions, Vol. 13, ( CunciI, I954). PP- 14'17° 2b by Mr. Alexander as, "the results which have been accompl- ished by the utilization of some of the in-service train- 26 ing devices mentioned above." Robert Meyer, in an article about the Chicago Sun-Times' fleet safety program, reported this company's fleet had a frequency rate of 1A.31 accidents per 100,000 vehicle miles in 1952. By 1959, six years after their fleet safety program had been inaugurated, their rate dropped to 3.03. In addition to the fleet safety program which was design- ed around the National Safety Council's Complete Motor Trans- portationservice, close attention was given to the driver selection procedure which included reference checks, driving history checks, physical examinations, personal interviews, attitude and road tests. Close supervision on the road and .regularly scheduled maintenance completed the over-all program.2 Spector Freight System supported a sound accident prevention program in citing a drop in the System's total number of accidents of more than 31 per cent from 1952 25 Ibid., p. 170 27 ' . Robert Meyer, "Chicago Sun-Times Headlines Safety," Traffic Safety, (March, 1959), pp. 30-32. 25 to 1954 despite a 10 per cent increase in total mileage during that period. An article written about Spector's program related that Spector officials regard careful driver selections as a fundamental principle of a good safety program. Their selecting standards were reported as high. Screening includes: (1) A personal interview by a driver supervisor. Past experience, appearance and attitude are sized up and evaluated in this interview. (2) A thorough check of the applicants' work history, police record, driving record, and personal references. (3) A physical examination. (A) A road test if the previous employer's opinion of the applicant's performance and ability indicates one is needed. The National Safety Council's Complete Motor Transport- ation Services were described as an integral part of Spector's 28 accident prevention program. 28 John Gwin "Spector Success Story " Public Safety (September, 1955): pp. 20-21. , , 26. In October, 195A, the Baltimore Yellow Cab Company introduced a fleet safety program into its operations. Coupled with this program were a regularly scheduled preventive maintenance and inspection procedure for its vehicles, a comprehensive driver selection procedure, and street supervisors who patroled the streets and ob- served drivers under actual driving conditions. When violations of safety regulations were observed by the street supervisors, they stopped the driver and explained why the violation could be serious. Both driver and supervisor were then scheduled into the main office and disciplinary action or retraining decided upon. A similar meeting was scheduled when a driver was involved in a pre- ventable accident. Over a three year period, 1954 through 1956, the Yellow Cab Company experienced an accident rate reduction from 7.41 accidents per 100,000 miles to a rate of 5.22.29 In 1950, I. C. Thomas, Superintendent of Safety, Sioux Falls Transit Company reported that the company's fleet safety program resulted in a 60 per cent reduction in accidents five years after the program was introduced. 29 Frank Davin, "Safety Rates Top Priority at Baltimore Yellow Cab," Traffic Safety, (August, 1957), pp. 50-53- 27‘ Incorporated in the program was the use of bulletin boards to give helpful aids in how to prevent accidents as well as a running account of how the fleet was doing re- garding accident experience. In addition, safety meetings were held quarterly at the start of the safety program. Drivers having earned safe driver awards received them at these meetings. Three years after the start of the program, safety meetings were scheduled every six weeks and award presentation meetings were held twice a year.30 Mr. Thomas stated in his article that, "We found that safety pays off in tangible ways. Our accident preven- tion program has put money in the bank for both our company and our drivers." When 1962 performance was compared with that of 1958, Lincoln Coach Lines, Irwin, Pennsylvania, found a 53.9 per cent reduction in total accidents. The company used 1958 as the base year for comparison because that was the year prior to the adoption of the company's present fleet safety program. 30 I. C. Thomas, "Sioux Falls Transit Is Safer," Public Safety, (October, 1950), pp. 8-9. 31 Ibid., p. 9. 28 The core of Lincoln's safety program was described as a bi-weekly evening discussion limited to seven partici- pants. Employees attended on a rotating basis and during the course of a year each man had studied the various parts of the total safety program. A comprehensive maintenance program was also reported as part of the company's safety effort. Coaches undergo a thorough mechanical over hauling every 4,000 miles. Both the company and the drivers enjoy a favorable image in the community and have received excellent press, radio, and television coverage of their safety activities.32 A reduction in the number of preventable accidents from more than 4 per month to less than one a month was attributed to the use of short weekly safety meetings at the New Orleans terminal of Couch.Motor Lines. At another company terminal, after the terminal manager began to participate in the weekly meetings, the number of accidents went from two per month to no accidents for nine months from the date of the first meeting. After three' years of weekly meetings at this terminal, the rate has remained under four accidents per year. 32 "Lincoln Coach Lines Program Cuts Total Accidents In Half," Traffic Safety, (July, 1903), p. 23. 29 W. T. Couch, Safety Engineer for Couch Motor Lines concluded: From the success of these two experiements . we know where to begin our safety efforts. We know the men will be no safer than their boss. They will think, act, drive safely, if their superior sincerely promotes ac- cident prevention. ' Vehicle maintenance and cooperation with drivers by quickly checking any complaints about the vehicles adds to the safety attitude of the drivers according to Mr. 3h - Couch. - Although a fleet safety program was in effect at Pacific Intermountain Express employing, among other things, a safe driver award program, frequent visits to branches, and personal letters to drivers from the safety director, one branch of city drivers was experiencing frequent and costly accidents. In view of this, the safety department tried a new approach; an individual interview with each driver at the branch. 33 _. . A. E. Nichols, "How to Organize an Effective Fleet Safety Program in a Lar e Fleet," National Safety Congress - Transactions, Vol. 18, IChicago, IIIinois: NationaI Safety Cbuncil, 1955), pp. 32. Ibid. 30 Interviews lasted about 15 minutes and were held during the first hour of work each morning in a quiet office away from distractions. It took two months to cover all 100 drivers. The driver was sent to the office where the interviewer first tried to put him at ease and then outlined the serious- ness of the accident problem in the branch. The driver was then asked for his cooperation and was asked whether he had any suggestions for reducing accidents in the fleet. This brought out complaints about equipment as well as con- structive suggestions. No reference was made of the driver's accident record unless the driver brought the subject up and started to talk about it. No written records were kept of the inter- view except for making a note of complaints or suggestions after the interview was completed. At the conclusion of the interview a plea for help was made, especially slanted at the more experienced drivers to pass on some of their knowledge to the new men. In the three months immediately prior to the meetings, the accident rate for this branch was 90.81 accidents per million miles. In the next three months, during and fol- lowing the interviews, the rate dropped to 39.95. A year later the rate was 41.92. 31 Frank M. Williams, Assistant Director of Safety for Pacific Intermountain Express, concluded that there were other things that may have interacted with the interviews to bring about the reduction, but that much of the change could be traced to the interviews.35 The Industrial Psychological Services of Johannesburg, South Africa, at one time the personnel selection depart- ment of the Johannesburg Public Utility Transport Corpora- tion, placed strong emphasis on personality tests in an attempt to predict accident.involvement in their bus openators. Two tests were used, the Thematic Apperception Test and a Social Relations Test which was developed by the Industrial Psychological Services. 2 For selection purposes, these tests were used to dis- tinguish between'good and bad risks. For in-service drivers the tests were used to diagnose a driver's difficulty . when he suddenly ran into trouble, i.e., increased acci- dent involvement. In both cases the tests were used to determine an employee's or potential employee's weaknesses and, armed Frank M. Williams, "P-I-E's Safety Program Has the Personal Touch," Traffic Safet , (November, 1963). pp. 21. 32 with this information, training could be used to overcome these weaknesses. At a talk before the Transit Section at the National Safety Congress, October, 1965, Lynette Shaw, Manager of the Industrial Psychological Services organiza- tion concluded that the psychological testing program ap- peared to be the controlling factor in a reduction of over 50 per cent in the accident frequency rate when the supply of applicants was sufficient to turn down the majority of applicants that failed the tests. Her conclusion was based on the company's experience in 1964 when it expanded, with a general South African industrial boom, to the point of a sudden need fbr 200 new drivers. 6 The company was forced to lower its selection standards and signed on 200 drivers irrespective of their test results. (Each of the 200 men had prior experience in and had drivers licenses for heavy vehicles. It was reported that 75 Per cent of these applicants had failed the personality tests. The dangers of this reversal of policy were- appreciated only too well, and, cosequently, supervision was stepped up to the hitherto unprecedented degree. Despite this fact, the ‘3? . Lynette Shaw, "The Practical Use of Projective Personality gests as Accident Predictors," National Safet Con ress - r’ansactions, Vol. 17 (ChicagoT-IIIIEEis: atIonaI Safety ounCII: 1965): PP. 36-53- 33 records of the majority of these men have already proved blatently unsatis- factory; the PUTCO buses have been in- volved in the sort of accidents that had become a thing of the past, and the corporate accident rate of the company had stopped declining and is showing a most ominous increase. Summayy. Most of the material obtained in the search for literature on fleet safety programs was of a descrip- tive nature presenting brief outlines of fleet safety pro- grams and citing reductions in accident experience. The review of literature as presented should not be construed to be all-inclusive of the available data on fleet safety programs. Rather, these materials are presented as representative examples of the types of studies that have been conducted regarding fleet safety programs and their relationship to accident experience. The review of the foregoing published materials supports) the conjecture that the available literature is neither sufficiently objective nor complete to either support or contradict the hypothesis. 37 Ibid., p. 43. 34 The objectivity of the published materials is ques- tioned because: 1. All of experience. Company safety administrators or personnel of safety oriented organizations assembled the materials as a means of illustrating the effects of safety program activities on accident experience. These materials were designed for presentation in safety oriented publications. It is only natural, therefore, that positive results, i.e., a reduction in accident ex- perience, would be presented. the literature cited improvements in accident Some of the materials related this improvement to a change in the fleet safety program activity. The improvements in accident experience cited in the studies appear to serve primarily an illustrative purpose and lack objectivity. Since negative results of fleet safety programs were net presented in the literature, two possible conclusions might be drawn from this: 1. Fleet safety programs consistently result in generally reduced accident experience 35 2. Reports of fleet safety programs that show no reduction in accident experience have not been published. In all cases, the literature was not sufficiently complete to determine whether the safety program activity fell within the definitions of the terms standard fleet safety program or sub-standard program. Finally, it was not possible to determine from the available literature whether there is a difference in accident frequency rates in fleets that have a fleet safety program and those that have no program since no published material was found that presented these comparative data. 'Par ‘-‘ hr“ 9&0; m3! 6‘) I . I ' waddg o: J? “ . CHAPTER III THE SURVEY I. DEVELOPMENT OF THE FLEET SAFETY PROGRAM ACTIVITY QUESTIONNAIRE The initial development of the questionnaire centered around a search for literature containing accident pre- vention and fleet safety program information. Spec- ifically, literature was sought that: (l) Described research on the effectiveness of fleet safety programs relative to reducing accident frequency rates; (2) Described actual fleet safety programs; (3) Described materials used in fleet safety programs. The questionnaire was designed as a five part form. Amongother sources, the following were relied on heavily in the development of the "Selection of Drivers" and “Accident Prevention Programming" sections of the question- , (1) Fleet Safety Manual - National Safety Council (2) Complete Motor Transportation Service Brochure - National Safety Council 37 (3) Driver Selection Procedure - American Trucking Associations, Inc. (4) Sights 2g Safety Service - American Trucking Associations, Inc. The "Operations," "Selection of Drivers," and "Vehicle Maintenance" sections were designed to provide a means by which similarities in the cooperating fleets could be matched for making possible comparisons of these fleets in the analysis of fleet safety programs and accident frequency rates. OPERATIONS The "Operations" section of the questionnaire was developed in an attempt to aid in the matching of fleets relative to size, type of vehicles operated, type of delivery service, area in which they operated, the time of day the drivers were driving and whether regular drivers covered the same assigned reutes each week. §§LECTION 0F DRIVERS Questions pertaining to procedures used in selection of drivers were developed to determine if the screening of applicants for driver-salesmen was similar in each of the cooperating bakery fleets. This information was also Utilized in the attempt to match fleets for later analysis. 38 ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROCRAMING This section was designed to measure the application of the four basic elgments in a standard fleet safety 3 program as defined. The data developed from this section was the basis for comparison of fleet safety programs in the cooperating bakery fleets. VEHICLE MAINTENANCE This was considered in the questionnaire to ascertain whether or not the vehicles being operated by the fleets included in this study received at least a minimum amount 39 of maintenance. ACCIDENT AND MILEAGE DATA Finally, the accident and mileage data requested was essential for the computation of accident frequency rates for each of the cooperating bakery fleets. These data were used in conjunction with the information from the other questionnaire sections in an attempt to determine trends in accident frequency rates. It is recognized that any of the five sections of the questionnaire could have contained a great variety of —_ 38 See Definitions - "Standard Fleet Safety Program", Chapter I, p. 7. 39 p 1C) See Definitions - "Minimum Maintenance", Chapter I, 39 detailed questions and, in fact, did in its initial develop- mental stages. However, it was condensed to the major . points of concern in terms of this study to facilitate a workable questionnaire; one that would not too readily discourage the cooperation of the wholesale bakery companies that had a fleet of delivery trucks that fell within the definition of the term fleet};O II. TESTING THE INITIAL QUESTIONNAIRE Once the questionnaire was condensed, i.e., after questions not essential to the study were deleted, it was field tested. Six dairy companies operating in the greater metropolitan Chicago area were contacted and agreed to serve as test fleets for the questionnaire. Using the initial V questionnaire, each of these fleets was surveyed at the company office. The survey was conducted as though these companies were actual fleets to be included in the study and the questionnaire was in final form. The field tests were conducted to determine: (1) Whether the questions and the wording used (were understandable and clear. 40 t See Definitions - "Fleet", Chapter I, p. 10. 40 (2) Whether it was possible to get the information requested. (3) The time it required for the survey to determine the feasibility of this approach. The field test suggested a number of revisions in the wording of several questions which were incorporated into the final questionnaire. I Throughout the period of designing the questionnaire, the Research Department and the Motor Transportation Department of the National Safety Council were consulted for critical reviews of each of the questionnaire drafts. III. SOURCE OF DATA Recognizing the large number of variables involved in any study outside a laboratory environment, especially when dealing with several organizations and many individuals spread over a wide geographic area, it was desirable that subjects for this study be as homogeneous as possible, in sufficient numbers, and assessable for a meaningful and workable study. To reduce the size of the geOgraphical area in which the study would be conducted, only city delivery fleets were considered. Few industries inany given city have a number of companies with similar operations that would lend 41 themselves to this type of study. To obtain a satisfactory number of fleets, an industry was needed which would provide an adequate number of companies operating in one city. 0f the few industries that fell into this category, three appeared to be the most promising: dairy; laundry; and bakery. Dairy and laundry have mixed delivery services, both wholesale and retail, to stores as well as private homes. They also have a wide variety of types of trucks in operation. Wholesale bakeries appeared to be the most homogeneous in all areas. (1) They operate the same kind and size of trucks .for the most part. (2) They deliver primarily to retail store outlets or institutions. (3) Different companies frequently deliver to the same locations consequently the geographical area covered is similar. On this basis, and because of the availability of these companies, Detroit metropolitan wholesale bakers and distributors operating in the Detroit metropolitan area including suburbs were chosen. The Michigan Bell Telephone Company Yellow Pages for [htroit were used as the source of wholesale bakery names 42 and locations. In all, there were 86 wholesale bakeries listed which, to the writers knowledge, is all the whole- sale bakeries in Detroit. Each of these companies was telephoned to determine if it had ten or more delivery trucks to constitute a fleet. Eighteen companies of the 86 qualified, i.e., had a fleet of ten or more vehicles, and all agreed to cooperate in the study. These eighteen fleets made up the population or sample for the study. IV. VARIABLES INVOLVED Expgsure EnvirOnmental elements. Since all fleets in the study operate in the same geographical area, this variable will be assumed to affect each fleet equally. Therefore, road, weather, road-side environment, location, traffic, light conditions, time of day, day of week, etc., will be con- sidered negligible variables. Exposgre based on number of miles operated. An attempt will be made to match companies operating approximately the same number of miles to nullify this exposure variable. Eguipment For the most part, the fleets in the study operate equipment that is similar in body style, i.e., van type trucks, and weight. An attempt was made to match fleets 43 on the basis of equipment. _Therefore, where this was done it is assumed that equipment variables are negligible. _Se1ection of Drivers. One section of the questionnaire was devoted to selec- tion and employment of driver-salesmen. Where these procedures are the same or similar in companies and an attempt has been made to match them in all other respects, selection procedures will be assumed a negligible variable. Training of Drivers Training was covered in the questionnaire in an attempt to match this factor and where matched in fleets, this variable will be considered negligible. However, a fleet safety program can be considered in-service training which might vary from fleet to fleet. Type of Operation The subjects all operate within the greater Detroit metropolitan area including suburbs. The study was limited to this geographical area in an effort to reduce the ex- posure variable. All companies involved in the study deliver to retail- stores and institutions, consequently all encounter similar delivery experience and exposure. This factor will be con- sidered negligible when other factors are matched. EEC I‘C ..‘, ,. .. natal‘ \ 44 Likewise, hours of operation, length of driver tenure, and route coverage will all be considered negligible variables when they are similar in the fleets in the study groups. V. METHOD OF CONDUCTING THE SURVEY Phase I - Initial Contact The initial contact with each of the 86 Detroit metropolitan wholesale bakeries was made by telephone. After a brief explanation that the call was regarding a study of the fleet safety programs of Detroit metropolitan bakeries, each company was asked the number of delivery trucks in its fleet. In each case where the company had ten or more trucks a more detailed description of the study was presented including the several areas of investigation covered in the questionnaire. At this point the cooperation of each of the subject fleets was solicited and a date set for a personal visit to the company offices. Each company was assured that company names and places would remain strictly confidential in the analysis of the data and writing of the survey report. Four companies of the eighteen cooperating in the study requested that the questionnaire be mailed to them because 0f their busy schedules or because only the parent company had the authority to give out some of the information. 45 Phase II - The Survey A second phone call was made to each of the cooperating companies on the day the meeting had been set for the survey to confirm the meeting time and convenience with the company representative. _ From one to two hours was spent on the survey at each company during which time each question on the question- naire was discussed. Where it was not possible to visit the company offices, the questionnaire was sent via mail accompanied by a cover letter.“1 Phase III - Follow-Up Accident and mileage data not available at the time of the survey was given to the writer by mail or arrange- ments were made to return to the company at a time when such data was obtainable. HI See Appendix B for sample letter No. 2. O ‘ n WSOiESc. inform: the stud hum g1 the year f) CHAPTER IV SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS OF DATA The representatives of the eighteen cooperating_ wholesale bakeries were generally open and free with information about their companies and appeared to make a concentrated effort to remain objective in their responses to the questionnaire. When a change in any of the programs occurred during the study period, each of the company representatives willingly provided the information that corresponded with the year and the changes. Most of the representatives had -been with their companies during the years covered by the study. ‘ 2 A Of the original eighteen wholesale bakery companies that agreed to cooperate in the study, fourteen companies furnished information on all five sections of the questionnaire. The remaining four companies were unable to provide accident or mileage data and are not included in the summary and analysis of the survey results. Since exposure, in terms of miles traveled, is probably one of the most critical variables in this study, the fourteen fleets are divided into three groups on the basis of their Emile. warka’c Group hcluc‘ 19. Group includ Cozpan fiVe b; #7 annual mileage. This also helps to facilitate a more workable summary and analysis of the data. The average mileage for each of the companies in Group 1 ranges from 150,000 to 252,000 miles per year and includes six bakeries; code numbers 3, 4, 13, 16, 17, and 19. The average mileage for each of the companies in Group 2 ranges from 800,000 to 950,000 miles per year and includes three bakeries; code numbers 6, 8, and 12. In Group 3, the average mileage for each of the companies ranges from 1,155,000 to 3,110,000 and includes five bakeries; code numbers 5, 9, 10, 11, and 14. A complete summary of the survey data for each of these groups is found in Appendix 0: Summary tables showing the responses to each of the questions in the survey are found in Appendix D. _ The remainder of this chapter is devoted to a summary and analysis of the survey data by groups. For purposes of this analysis, an increase or decrease in the frequency rate trend of each of the companies in the study is based on whether or not the frequency rate of each company in the year 1964 is higher or lower than at the start of each company's reported experience. .1. :,. km ‘A G W A V a‘M‘N I a “a“ 48 I. GROUP 1 Operations Generally, the six companies in Group 1 are similar in their operations. Differences were noted in only four areas. Five of the six companies in Group 1 make 90 per cent or more of their deliveries to retail stores, with delivery to restaurants and institutions such as hospitals, schools, etc., making up the remainder of their deliveries. Company 4. delivers solely to restaurants and institutions. This latter company's delivery hours also differ most widely from the others. Its restaurant and institution deliveries are made between the hours of 3:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. These hours extended beyond the other five companies which have a range of delivery hours of 5:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The maximum number of hours a driver may work each day varies from 8 to 12 hours in .the six companies. Four of the six cempanies (3, 4, l6, and 19) had a change in their operations during the ten-year period of the study. Three of these experienced a general increase in the size of their delivery area. The fourth, Company 16, increased delivery to larger supermarkets and decreased delivery to small grocery stores. However, no mileage increase was experienced. tion 1 86%!) #9 Selection of Drivers Of the sixteen items investigated in the driver selec- tion procedure section of the questionnaire, differences in seven of the items were found. These seven are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5'. 6. 7. Three companies (4, 13, and 19) use a planned- interview checklist when interviewing an applicant. Companies 3, 16, and 17 do not. All but one company (16) check references and previous employers of applicants. Three companies (3, 13, and 19) check applicants' driving records through local or state government agencies. Companies 4, 16, and 17 do not. A physical examination is required before employ- ment by three companies (3, 13, and 16). Three companies (4, l7, and 19) do not require pre- employment physical examinations. Two companies (13 and 19) give pre-employment driving tests which are conducted on the road under actual traffic conditions. - All but one company (17) have age limits for applicants. These limits range from 21 to 45. Four companies (3, l3, l7, and 19) have minimum educational requirements, i.e., high school. Two companies have no minimum education requirements I (In 16) e ~ I r-yt‘ A l‘aahli Uc _ 50 Maintenance All of the companies in Group 1 employ a maintenance program as defined. Frequency Rate There is no over-all trend presented by the frequency rates of the six companies in Group 1. Generally, the yearly fluctuations of accident frequency rates in any one company are quite pronounced, see Figure 1. This is not too surprising since the mileage of each company is relatively low, ranging from 150,000 to 252,000. Thus, each accident has considerable impact on the final year-end frequency rate. Two companies, (13 and 16), show a general reduction in frequency rate over the ten-year period. Two companies, (4 and 19), ShOW'a general increase, although the fluctuations of the frequency rate for these companies over the five and six year periods shown in Figure 1 show little change in the rate from the first year of their reported experience compared to the last year, 1964. Company 17, did not supply exact accident data but estimated the average number of accidents over the ten-year period. Company 3 began record keeping in 1963 and gave exact accident data for 1963 and 1964. Prior to this, accident experience was estimated by this company. Neither company is included in the final analysis because of the 51 m :mm— .mmm— Nmm— —mm— owm— mmm— wmmp hmm— mmm— 9.3— A _ _ _ 1A _ _ _ _ _ a 1 \e IIIIII a \\ ~eu l \ / ~ . . A i s 11 My. , \\. a 1. a a \e\\ / I \ sx x I \ \ e a s a II: \uwa \ s \\//b/ «P N , 11 \ . X \ // \ VP N a, . ..111211.., n .. . . ~111.1. . . .111... 1. ea. \\\.1t. , a , .11mw‘m-_ 1. x , . \ x/ \ , . \ /\ ms ,, mozmmp mpuzmadmmm _ gnome h ULUWWII— *l ‘OJ‘NO N— :— m— 2 ON NN . :N mm mm on mm on mm. mm o: N: E m: om EIVH ADN BITCHES 52 limited amount of exact accident experience available. Company 3. The accident data provided by this company was estimated through 1962. Accurate accident records were started in 1963 and actual accident data was available for 1963 and 1964. However, this did not provide enough informa- tion for frequency rate trend comparison with the other companies in the group. 2 In 1964, monthly driver letters and more frequent safety meetings were introduced in this company. Prior to this, safety posters (changed monthly) and bulletin boards for safety materials constituted this company's fleet safety program. It is interesting to note the decrease in the accident frequency rate experienced by this company in 1964. However, not enough data is available to determine the cause of this reduction. This company employs two of the four elements basic to an standard fleet safety prOgram. These are: (1) driver training (through the fleet safety program materials); and (2) record keeping on individual drivers' records. Company 4. Accurate accident data was available from this company from 1960 through 1964, a five-year period. Considerable fluctuations in the accident frequency rate occurred in this company during the five years of reported ex1391‘ience. However, there was little difference between 53 the rates at .the beginning of the reporting period, 1960 and the last year in the reporting period, 1964. The frequency rate trend for this company shows a general increase over the 5 year reporting period. This company's fleet safety program activity remained the same from 1960 through 1964 and consisted of the use of safety posters and monthly safety meetings. Two of the four basic elements in a standard fleet safety program are employed by‘this company. Therefore, its pmgram is considered sub-standard. The elements used are: (1) driver training (through the use of fleet safety program materials); and (2) record keeping on the individual drivers' performances. Company 13. The greatest amount of accident frequency rate fluctuation of any company in this group was experienced by Company 13 throughout the ten-year period of the study. In spite of fluctuating rates, the frequency rate trend shows a decrease from 1955 through 1964. A sub-standard fleet safety program was in operation and remained unchanged throughout the study period. Three Of'the elements of a standard program were used: (1) driver training (through the fleet safety program materials); (2) be cord keeping on individual drivers' performances; and (3) be cognition for good driving performances. No standard 5b of driving performance, the fourth basic element in a standard program, was specified by this company. Safety program materials and activities used by this company include the following: (1) monthly driver letters; (2) safety posters, changed monthly; (3) bulletin board materials; and (4) an annual safety meeting. A Company 16. Company 16 experienced the least fluctua- ltion in its frequency rate trends. The over-all trend for the ten-year study period was a general decrease in the frequency rate. Of the six companies in Group 1, Company 16 is the only one with a standard fleet safety program as defined. (This program remained unchanged for the study period, 1955 through 1964. This company bases their standard of driving on the number of traffic violations a driver has. If any driver has excessive violations, he is taken off the road. Their fleet safety program materials and activities include: (1) monthly driver magazines; (2) occasiona1_ booklets on safe driving practices; (3) safety posters changed monthly; (4) use of bulletin boards for safety information; and (5) monthly safety meetings. It is interesting to note that this company reported no initial training of new drivers on vehicles or route layout. 55 This company is also the only one of the six in this group to: 1. Give remedial training on the basis of individual accident experience 2. Keep an accident analysis sheet 3. Analyze accidents as to primary types Company 17. Accident data was estimated by this company for the ten-year period of the study and could not be used in the analysis. Company 12. Accurate accident data was available from this company for a six year period, 1959 through 1964, and showed considerable fluctuation during these six years. However, there was little difference between the experience reported in 1959 and that reported at the end of the period in 1964. But this difference does show an increase in the frequency rate trend during this time period. The fleet safety program employed by thiscompany remained.the same for the reporting period and included the use of: (l) occasional booklets on safe driving practices; (2) safety posters changed monthly; (3) bulletin board fer A safety information; and (4) quarterly safety meetings. Two elements of a standard fleet safety prOgrmn are employed by Company 19. Its fleet safety program, therefore, is considered sub-standard. The two elements used are: 56 (1) driver training (through the fleet safety program materials); and (2) record keeping on individual drivers' performances. II. GROUP 2 Operations Of the companies within each of the three groups, the companies in Group 2 differ the most from each other regarding their general operating policies. 1. Each company operates a different type of vehicle. 2. Each has different operating hours. 3. Two companies (8 and 12) have a policy on the maximum hours a driver can work per day; the maximum being eight hours. Company 6 has no maximum hours policy. 4. The drivers in two companies (6 and 8) cover the same assigned routes each week. In Company 12, the drivers change routes periodically so that in time each driver will cover every route operated by the company. Selection of Drivers The divergence of practices and policies in the selection of drivers was less pronounced than in the data obtained from the operations section of the questionnaire for Group 2. Four areas of variation were found. 57 l. A planned-interview checklist is used by one company (6).' Companies 8 and 12 do not use a checklist. 2. Two companies (6 and 8) give behind-the-wheel driving tests to the applicant. Company 12 hires only men inexperienced in driving the type I vehicles used by this company and trains them from the beginning on company equipment. 3. Company 6 administers an arithmetic test but none of the other tests listed in the questionnaire. Companies 8 and 12 give no written tests. 4. Company 12 will hire no one under 21. The other two companies (6 and 8) have no age limit. Maintenance Each of the companies in Group 2 employed a maintenance pregram as defined. Frequency Rate The three companies in Group 2 have no over-all combined accident frequency rate trend. Rather, each company's accident experience trend varies directionally from the other as shown in Figure 2. One company shows a general increase in frequency rate trend. Another company shows a general decrease in the trend of accident frequency rate. The third takes a middle course; at first declining and then swinging back up to an increase in the trend. 58 +63 d . mem— _ Nem— _ _em_ _ m oem. amm— _ _ _emm_ L Amm— _ ema— _ mmm. _ mozmm... w._.uzuzdmm... N .595 N 01.3ka \Ofi'NO N— +1 @— m— cm «N :N mm mm on mm :m mm mm o: N: m: w: om BIVH MN 30038 :I 59 The types of fleet safety programs used varied considerably. During the ten years of this study, Company 12 had a standard fleet safety program, Company 6 had a sub-standard program and Company 8 had no program at all. The mileage for these companies ranged from 800,000 to 950,000 miles per year. Consequently, each accident the companies experienced had less impact on their accident frequency rates than was experienced by the companies in Group 1 which had considerably lower mileage. Although fluctuation in the rates from year to year is quite evident, for the most part, this fluctuation is considerably less than Group I experienced. This results in a clearer picture of the direction the trends take. Accurate accident data for the ten years of the study was obtained for all three companies. Company 6. Company 6 employed a standard fleet safety program until 1959. In 1959, their activity was reduced to a sub-standard program when records on individual drivers' perfbrmances were no longer kept and recognition for good driving perfbrmance was terminated. After a sharp increase in the accident frequency rate from 1955 through 1957, a sharp reverse trend occurred and continued through 1960. It is interesting to note that 60 a general increase occurred after 1960, one year after the standard fleet safety program had been altered to a sub- standard program. The over-all accident frequency rate trend for Company 6 shows a general increase. Safety program materials used by Company 6 include the following: (1) occasional booklets containing safe driving information; (2) safety posters changed monthly; (3) bulletin boards for safety materials; and (4) safety meetings combined with sales meetings held monthly. Company 8. The frequency rate for this company fluctuated considerably over the ten-year period of this study. However, there was definitely a general increase .in the frequency rate trend. Company 8 had no fleet safety program throughout the study period. No standard of driving performance was outlined by this company, fleet safety program materials and activities were not regularly scheduled, and driver records and recognition were also absent. Company 8 is the only one of the fourteen companies used in the study without a fleet safety pregram. Company 12. Throughout the ten-year period of this study, Company 12 had a standard fleet safety program in- effect. The frequency rate of this company fluctuated the 61 least of the three companies. The over-all rate trend for the ten year period was a general decrease. This company operated only tractor, semi-trailer combinations whereas the other companies operated 2-axle vehicles exclusively. Company 12 was also the only company in Group 2 or in the entire study that trained unskilled employees to drive company equipment via a scheduled behind-the-wheel training program. In addition, they employed fleet safety program materials on a regularly scheduled basis. Company 12 used the following safety program materials: (1) occasional booklets containing safe driving information; (2) safety posters changed weekly; (3) bulletin boards for safety materials; and (4) safety meetings held bi-monthly. III. GROUP 3 Operations For the most part, the operations of the companies in Group 3 are quite similar. Each company operates a van-type truck ranging from 6,000 to 14,000 pounds.- All but one company delivers 90 per cent or more to retail stores. One company (14) delivers 75 Per cent to retail stores and 25 per cent to restaurants. Hours of delivery range around the clock. However, 62 over 90 per cent of the deliveries are made between 4:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Company 14 again deviates the greatest from the group since only 75 per cent of its deliveries are made between the above hours and 25 per cent are made between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Two companies have policies on the maximum number of hours their drivers may work. In Company 9 the maximum number of hours is 7, and in Company 14 the maximum is 8. Only Company 9 reported a change in operations which resulted in shorter working hours for drivers. At one time this company's drivers were allowed to stay on the road as long as they wished.’ Selection of Drivers It is interesting to note that in 5 of the 16 items investigated in the driver selection procedure section of the questionnaire, Companies 9 and 10 deviated from the rest of the group by including a procedure or policy in their selection process that the rest of the group did not have. In two of these five areas, as indicated in the following list, Company 5 also followed the procedure of Companies 9 and 10. The five items incorporated into their selection program by Companies 9 and 10 and not used by the other companies are: 63 1. They use an interview checklist. 2. They check the driving record of the applicant before hiring (Company 5 also does this). 3. Each gives an on-the-road driving test to check the applicants' skills before hiring. 4. A laws and ordinances test is given by each company (Company 5 also does this). 5. Both companies have age limits Other deviations in driver selection procedure be- tween companies in Group 3 include the following: 1. Only two companies (5 and 9) give traffic and driving knowledge tests. 2. These same two companies give other written tests. Company 5 administers the Wonderlicht Personality Test to applicants. 'Company 9 gives 1.0. and Sales Aptitude tests. 3. Company 10 is the only company in Group 3 that (requires minimum driving experience but the minimum was not stated. 4. Two companies (5 and 14) have minimum education requirements, a high school diploma being required by both. IEach of the companies in Group 3 employed a maintenance 64 program as defined. Fre quency Rate As in the other two groups, there is no over-all trend of frequency rates in the five companies in Group 3, see Figure 3. ' Annual fluctuations of accident frequency rates is - generally the least of all groups as might be expected since the annual mileage for these fleets runs highest of the three groups, ranging from 1,155,000 to 3,110,000 miles. Thus, one or two accidents in any one year would nOt change the frequency rate picture as much as it might in other companies with less annual mileage. Companies 9 and 10 show a general reduction in their rates over the ten years of the study period. Companies 5 and 14 show a general increase in their accident frequency rate; especially Company 14 which (except for one year) shows an increase each year during its reporting period, 1958 through 1964. Company 11 had accident data for only 1963 and 1964. Consequently, this did not provide enough information . for comparison with other companies. Company 5. Accident data for this company was av""ji-J-El‘ole from 1961 through 1964, a period of four years. A Clec=«’t‘ease in accident frequency rate occurred during mczmmh mFOZdemmk- M ADOEO /\:f10h W¢ OT 01R” 65 m 3mm. mom_ «mm. —mm— ocm— mmm— wmm— nmm— wmm— . mmmp _ a q _ _ . — a 1_ s . J 0/ CI // \X\ l./ [W In / \\ / 11 . / .\ ./ / / \\\ x I , xx/x. / ./ x . / ell... / .“MY7/. ll \ / . /. / \\ // I. m, emu .\ xi / .r. E .C x . .. O O O ‘ \ / l / a .\\\PIIII*IIIJ\\\V4 / \ HHHU .l +\11l+1.... / x. .\ , 11 / x / \ l x a x x 11 /\ 11 PE 1 maze: “Ex 52335. n enema M 0L3mwk u» d'tN,<: ~— :— mp m— 0N «N :N mm mN on «m in mm mm o: N: m: w: om 3IVH A3N3flD3HJ 65 m :mm— mmm— Nmm— —mm— omm— mmm— wmm— hmm— mmm— mmmp _ 1 _ fl _ _. _ A ,_ s _ ./ I // \\ I/l) / \\ / . _/ fl\ 2, / / \\\ / / /.U7A. // .//I x \n/ / o/ / \ o / \\\ // . I/J / . \.\\\\ /,, N N hHu .\. Yunna- J. . mflm C .. . . . \ \\\. / / .B \x +/.\ / PK +\\.1l+l.. / x . e\\ z / \ / \ z i x x /\ RE mozmmh mh<¢ >ezmaammu. m enema m teamed u> m-cu c: N. r. e. a. on NN ru em em on an rm en em or N: m: w: om 3IVH A3N300383 66 two years, 1962 and 1963. However, in 1964 the rate increased above the 1961 starting level. The over-all trend of the frequency rate for Company 5 shows a general increase. Company 5 is one of two companies in Group 3 that trains all new drivers in the basic driving skills, in addition to the fleet safety program materials used. This company's fleet safety program activity has not changed through the reporting period of 1961 through 1964. Three of the basic elements in a standard fleet safety program are employed. Therefbre, this company's program is considered sub-standard by definition. The elements used are: (1) driver training (both behind-the-wheel and through the use of fleet safety program materials); (2) record keeping on individual drivers' performances; and (3) recognition for good driving performance. Fleet safety program materials used by Company 5 include: (1) occasional booklets on‘safe driving practices; (2) safety posters changed monthly; and (3) safety meetings conducted monthly. Company 9. Accident data was obtained for the ten- year study period and the accident frequency rate trend for Company 9 showed a general decline for this period. This company had a standard fleet safety program 67 which remained unchanged throughout the ten-year study period. This company's standard of driving performance is tmsed on a given number of accidents during a given period cu'time. If a driver experiences more than three accidents in five years, he is subject to dismissal. The fleet safety program materials used by Company 9 include: (1) occasional booklets on safe driving practices; (2) safety posters changed monthly; (3) bulletin boards; and (4) safety meetings held semi-annually. _ Three types of safe driver awards are given by this company; pins or emblems, merchandise and special letters of commendation. Company 9 is the only one in this group and in the entire study that gives three different types of awards. Company 10. Company 10 experienced the most marked reduction in their accident frequency rate during the study period of any of the companies in the study. The rate trend fer this company shows a definite decline. A standard fleet safety program was employed by this cOmpanyduring the study period, 1955 through 1964. It 18 interesting to note the changes that occurred in this Program over these years. (In 1957, posters and bulletins were introduced into 68 the fleet safety program as added materials. Also in 1957, a fleet safety director was appointed. In 1959, an improved‘. system of keeping drivers' individual driving performances was initiated. Also in 1959, following irregularities in making safe driver awards during the years 1955 through 1958, their recognition program was put on a more systematic basis. 2 Company 10 also provides training in basic driving skills for all new drivers, in addition to the in-service training provided through the fleet safety program materials. Fleet safety program materials and activities used by this company are: (1) occasional booklets of safe g driving practices; (2) safety posters changed monthly; (3) bulletin boards for safety literature; and (4)safety _ meetings held quarterly. I Company 11. Accident data from this company was available only from 1963 when their accident record keeping system was inaugurated. This did not provide enough informa- 'tion for frequency rate trend comparisons with other companies in the group. 2 . Safety posters, bulletin boards for safety materials, and occasional distribution of booklets comprise this c("illlpany's fleet safety program. This company employed three of the four standard 69 fleet safety program elements. Therefore, their program was classified as sub-standard. A standard of driving performance was not included in the program of Company 11. Company 14. 'Accident information for seven years (1958 through 1964) was available from Company 14. The frequency rate trend for this period showed a gradual increase. A sub-standard fleet safety program was in operation' throughout this time which included: (1) driver training (through the use of fleet safety program materials); (2) record keeping on individual drivers' performances; and (3) recognition for good driving performance. Although cumulative records of individual drivers' performances were not kept, copies of the actual accident report submitted by drivers were kept in their personnel file. During this company's reporting period recognition was awarded every six months when each deserving driver ‘Was given points applicable toward merchandise gifts. Fleet safety prOgram materials used by Company 14 include: (1) occasional booklets on safe driving techniques; (2) safety posters changed bi-monthly; (3) bulletin boards for safety literature; and'(4) safety meetings held quarterly. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND NEED FOR FURTHER RESEARCH I. CONCLUSIONS GROUP 1 The data outlined in Group 1 of this study neither support nor reject the hypothesis that there is no difference in the trends of accident frequency rates in motor vehicle fleets employing standard fleet safety programs, as defined, and fleets employing sub-standard programs, as defined. Discussion. A comparison of accident frequency rate trends of Company 13 using a sub-standard program.and Company 16 with a standard program shows that both experienced a general reduttion in their rates over the ten-year A period of the study. However, Company 16 shows a generally (.more stable frequency rate pattern. A comparison of the accident frequency rate trend Of Company 16 with the rate trends of Companies 4 and 19, . both with sub-standard programs, tends to reject the hYpothesis. The rates of both Company 4 and Company 19 generally tended to increase during comparable periods 01' time, 1959 through 1964., However, the rate trend of Company 16 decreased during this period pointing up a difference in the trends of accident frequency rates in 71 fleets employing a standard fleet safety program as contrasted to fleets using a sub-standard program. Group 1 data also shows that the use of a fleet safety program does not always result in over-all reduced accident frequency rate trends. GROUP 2 The hypothesis is rejected by the frequency rate data presented in Group 2. An accident frequency rate comparison of Company 12 with its standard fleet safety program and Companies 6 and 8 with their sub-standard programs shows a noticeable difference in the frequency rate trends over the ten-year period of the study. Discussion. The differences in the over-all rate trends are seen in Figure 2, page 58. Further support of the conclusion reached from Group 2 data is seen in the variation in the frequency rate trend for Company 6. A standard fleet safety program was used by Company 6 from 1955 through 1959. During this period, except 'for a sharp rise in 1957, this company experienced a general decline in their frequency rate. At the end of 1959, two Parts of their pragram were discontinued, to wit: (1) record keeping on individual drivers' perfbrmances; and (2) recogni- tion for good driving perfOrmance. In 1960, following the terminatiOn of these two elements of their standard 72 fleet safety program, the frequency rate trend fer Company 6 reversed and showed a gradual increase which continued through 1964. ' ' Group 2 data also shows that the use of a fleet safety program does not necessarily always result in over-all reduced accident frequency rate trends. This is especially evident in the experience of Company 6. Finally, the data from this group tends to show a difference in trends of frequency rates in companies with fleet safety programs and those with no fleet safety program.‘ This difference is particularly evident in the frequency rate trend comparison of Company 8 with no program and Company 12 with a standard program. GROUP 2 ’ The data outlined in Group 3 of this study rejects the hypothesis that there is no difference in frequency rate trends of companies using standard fleet safety PrOgrams and companies using sub-standard programs. Discussion. Comparisons of Companies 9 and 10, _ b0th using standard fleet safety programs, with Companies 5 and 14, both using subestandard programs, show over- all differences in the frequency rate trends. The frequency rate experience of Company 11 was too limited for purposes '°f comparison. 73 Data in this group also show that the use of fleet safety programs does not always result in reduced frequency rate trends. It is also interesting to note the rate trend of Company 10 and the changes which occurred in this company's fleet safety program activities during 1957 and 1959. I In 1957, a safety director was appointed and safety posters and bulletins were initiated. Following an irregular application of their safe driver award program during 1955 through 1958, their recognition program was put on a more regular basis in 1959. SUMMARY In all the comparisons except one, a difference in frequency rate trends occurred in companies with standard fleet safety programs as contrasted to those using sub- standard programs. Regarding the exception noted above, to obtain additional information with respect to this company-(which might explain the contradictory results) would require going beyond the scope of this study. I I Since the above exception does exist, it cannot be concluded that the data in this study either supports or rejects the hypothesis that there is no difference in the trends of accident frequency rates in motor vehicle 74 fleets employing standard fleet safety prOgrams and fleets employing sub-standard programs. Data from the study does show, however, that in each case where a standard fleet safety program was in effect, each of the companies experienced a reduction in their accident frequency rate trend. The study also illustrates, with one exception, that companies using sub-standard fleet safety programs experience increases in their frequency rate trends. This supports the conclusion reached in the review of the literature which stated that reports of fleet safety programs showing no reduction in accident experience failed to get published. Only one company was found in the study that had no fleet safety program of any kind. Even though the frequency rate trend of this company showed an increase during the study period, it was felt that the experience of one company was insufficient to permit drawing a conclusion as to whether there are differences in accident frequency rate trends in companies with fleet safety programs and those without programs. II. NEED FOR FURTHER STUDY It is recognized that a large number of variables 75 are involved in any study outside a controlled environment, especially when dealing with several organizations, and many individuals administering in a variety of ways the differing safety prOgrams and policies within these organ- izations. This study is no exception. Because of these variables many questions remain unanswered. Considerably more research is needed to provide the data required to resolve these questions. Additional research into the relationship of the variety of factors that might influence accident frequency rate trends in motor vehicle fleets includes: 1. Further study of pre-employment and in-service driver training to determine the relationship of this factor to accident frequency rate trends. 2. Research into whether the four elements of a standard fleet safety program as defined in this study provide the best criteria for judging the effectiveness of a fleet safety prOgram. 3. A detailed study of the various parts of fleet safety prOgrams and the individual relationship of these parts to accident frequency rates of fleets. I 4. Detailed evaluation of the relationship between differences in the application of the specific 76 parts of standard and sub-standard fleet safety programs and accident frequency rate trends. 5. A study of the role top management's support of safety policies and fleet safety prOgram activities plays in accident frequency rate trends. 6. Research into the relationship between differing driver selection techniques and company accident frequency rate trends. 7. A study of the relationship of different environ- mental elements such as road, weather, and traffic conditions, time of day or week, etc., to accident frequency rate trends. 8. Investigation into whether the type of vehicle operated by a company is a factor in increased or decreased frequency rate trends. It can be seen from the above list that considerable data is still needed to determine the true relationship of fleet safety programs to accident frequency rate trends. This study, therefore, represents the beginning of needed research into the multiplicity of factors surrounding fleet safety prOgrams and the determination of the relation- ship of these factors to accident frequency rate trends. It should be considered by no means and end product but rather a preview of vast amounts of infbrmation yet to be compiled, digested and ultimately used to benefit mankind. 77 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS The Driver-Trainer His Role in the Fleet Safet Pro ram. American Trucking AssociEEions,IInc., Washington, D.C., 1955. Simons, R. H. and Grimaldi, J. V. Safet Management. Richard D. Irwin, Inc., Homewood, IIlinois, I956. 555 PP. B. -PUBLICATIONS OF LEARNED SOCIETIES AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS Accident Reports and Records. Fleet Safety Manual Part IV. Chicago, Illifiois: National Safety Council, revised, The Accident Review Committee. Fleet Safety Manual Part VIII. Chicago, IIIinois: National Safety Council, revised, 19590 Alexander, Carlton. Evaluating PrOgress Throu h In-Service Trainin . National Safety Congress - Transactions. VoI. I8, pp. 14-17. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1954. American Standard Method 2; Recording 33g Measurin Motor e icIe Fleet Accident Experience - DI5.I-I95é. New York, New York: AmeriCan Standards Association, Inc., November 29, 1960. Carter William W. Selecting the Ri ht Desi n Egg Your Fleet Safety Pro ram. NaEIEnaI Safety ongress — Transactions. 0 . 8, pp. 11 plus. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1958. - Complete Motor Transportation Service. (Brochure describing the NatIonaISafety CounciI's eret safety service.) Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1962. Contest Rules, National Fleet Safet Contest. Chicago, linois: INational safety CounciI, revised July 1, 1964. ‘ ' 79 Cooke, Max. How t__o Choose an Architect for Your Fleet Safety Pro ram. National Safety Congress - Transactions. 0 . pp 8-Il. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1958. Couch, W. T. How to Organize an Effective Fleet Safety Pro ram iHISmZIlIFleets. INationaISafety Congress - Transactions. IVoI. 187 pp. 31-33. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1955. Curcio E. A. Buildin the Foundation For Your Fleet Safety Program. NationaI Safety Congress - Transactions. 0 . pp. 19-21. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1958. Driver Training. Fleet Safety Manual Part III. Chicago, IlIinois: National Safety Council, revised, 1963. Ellison, David E. A Doctor Prescribes for Transit Safet . National Safety Congress - Transactions. VoI. 28, pp 6- 9. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1955- Emond, E. J. How to Put Accident Cost Information to Work. National Safety Congress - TransactIOns. VoI.II8, pp. 27-29. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1955. EvaLluation of Safety Programs. Research.on Techniques of Iccident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 2. pp. 31 plus. Stamford, Connecticut: Dunlap and Associates, Inc., Elszsgt Safet Posters. Fleet Safety Memo Number 2. Chicago, I anls: National Safety Council, revised, 1964. 125%: JFleet Safet Pro ram. Fleet Safety Manual Part I. Chicago, linOls: National Safety Council, revised, 1962. FOI‘ E ° . -—~. xperts Onl . Chicago IllinOls. National Safety 0 oil . ’ _. Foust, Arthur S. Personal Inur Problems of Vehicle Operators - AISymposium; SeIections. NEtionaI Safety CEngress - Transactions. IVOI. II3 p. 16. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1958. 80 d Getting Started. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Counc1I, revised, 19oh. Hightower, J. P. How £9 Measure the Value of Your Accident Prevention Pro ram. NationaI Safety CEngess - - Transactions. VoI. 18, pp. 33-35. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1955. Inflioff Chris. Better Driving is Better Business. Chicago Illinois: NationaI Safety—Council, I96h. ’ Knudson, J. K. Motor Transportation - Its Vital Role grid Its Needless Cost. INationaI Safety COngress - Transactions. Vol. 20, pp. 5-8. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1951. Lowden, Harry. Adding the Finishirg Touches to Your Fleet Safet Pro ram. NationaI Safety CongresEI; Transactions. VoI. S, pp. 25-28. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1958. LyeJJL .Melvin G. What We Ex ect From Operators of Hi hwa Vehicles. NationaIISafety Congress - TransEEtions. V01. 7, pp. 6h-67. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1957. McFarland, Ross A. and Moseley, Alfred L. Human Factors In Hi hwa Transport Safet . Boston,.MassacHusettes: HErvara School of Pub 1c afet , 195A. Minimum Standards For Selection and Training 2;: Personnel. ashington, D. C.: American TrucEing issociations, Inc., 1956. Na‘3flLona1 Safet Congress - Transactions. (Historical copies of these puincations describe—TIEet safety prOgrams in use prior to 193h). Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council. N13 hols A. E. How to Or anize an Effective Fleet Safety Pr6 ram igflEIIarge Féeet. NationaI Safety Congress - ransactlons. . IS, pp. 30-31. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1955. Ree Ves, Bluer R. Dividends Resulting From Standardized Accident Reporting and AnaIysis. NationaI Saféty Congress - Transactions. 'Vol. 20, pp. Zl-ZA. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1950. 81 Safka Driver Award Rules. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety CSunciI, January, 1964. Safe Driving Techniques. Training Key # 20, Field Service Division, International Association of Chiefs of Police, 1319 18th Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20036. 196A. Safety Meetings For Commercial Drivers. Fleet Safety Memo INumberII3I Chicago, IIIinois: National Safety Council, February, 1950. Selection 3f Drivers. Fleet Safety Manual Part II. Chicago, IIIinois: National Safety Council, February, 196A. Shaw, Lynette. The Practical Use 2.: Projective Personality . Tests as Accident Predictors. NationaI’SaTEty Congress - TransacEions. VoI. 17, pp. 39-43. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1965. «Si. tits on Safety Driver Safety Program. American Trucking - (sEKc1at)ons, Inc., 0 P treet, Washington, D. C. No Date . Tk>rtney, J. L. How 22 Determine Fleet Accident Cost. National SETEty Congress - Transactions. VoI. 18, pp. 20-27. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1955. 20111“: P. F. The Army Transportation Corps Safet Pro ram. National Safety Congress - Transactions. V I. I, pp 17-21. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council, 1955. C. PERIODICALS . Alexander, Carlton. "Psychological’Tests for Drivers at the McLean Truckin Company," Traffic Quarterly, -.April,.l953, pp. 1 6-197. 0 churn, Paul H. "For Safer Police Driving," Traffic Digest .and Review, October, 1953, pp. 13-15. C 0311 ck, Carl. "Million Dollar Fleet Program For $247," Public Safet , July, 1951., p. 12. 82 Davin, Frank. "Safety Rates Top Priority At Baltimore Yellow Cab," Traffic Safety, August, 1957, pp. 50-53. Deming, W. E., Battey, A. D. and Cunningham, J. D. "A Statistical Test of Significance Applied to a Socio- logical Problem: Variation in Accident Rates From Motor Vehicles," American Sociolo ical Review, Vol. 17, No. 6, December, 1952, pp. 755-75I. Ehrenberger, Charles. "Standard's Safety Story," Traffic Safet , January, 1959, pp. 30-33. Finch, A. 0. "Police Fleets Need Safety Too," The Police Chief, November, 1956, pp. Al-AZ. . "You Gotta Dig to Weed Out Accidents," Public Safety, October, 1956, pp. 12-13. Goldstein, Leon C. "Accident Prevention Research," Public Health Reports, Vol. 78, No. 7, July, 1963, pp. 5633557. Gwin, John. "Spector Success Story," Public Safet , Hipskind, V. K. "The Development of a Police Safety PrOgram," Police, January-February, 1965, pp. 60-63. Hoenniger, A. R. "Police Fleet Safety," Traffic Digest and Review, March, 1962, pp. 10-15 plus. Hosea, Harold R. "Safety PrOgrams Pay Off in Intercity Bus Operations," Public Safet , March, 1956, p. 17. "It Takes More Than Luck,“ Public Safet , August, 1952, pp. h-6 plus. "Lincoln Coach Lines PrOgram Cuts Total Accidents In Half," Traffic Safet , July, 1963, p. 23. Lumpkin, J. W. "Fleet Safety On The Move," Traffic Safet , May, 1963, pp. 28-30 plus. McGlade, Frank and Laws, F. D. "Classifying Accidents: A Theoretical Viewpoint," Traffic Safet Research Review, Vol. 6, No. 1, March, I962, pp. 2-8. Meyer, Robert. "Chicago Sun-Times Headlines Safety," ‘Traffic Safet , March, 1959, pp. 30-32. , 83 Michaela, Richard M. "Two Simple Techniques For Determining The Significance of Accident-Reducing Measures," Traffic Safet , June, 1960, pp. 16-17. O'Connell, Gerald. "Safety Program Tops Operating Policies ' For Police Fleets," Traffic Digest and Review, February, 1963, pp. 8-I2. Ross, H. Lawrence. "Schematic Analysis of the Driving Situation," Traffic Safet Research Review, Vol. A, No. 3, SeptemEer, I96 , pp. 2I:2u. ' "Safety Protects Profits," Commercial Car Journal, July, l96h, pp. 126-129._ "Seattle Reports 1953-54 City Vehicle Fleet Record," Public Safety, January, 1955, p. 27. Shaw, L. and Sichel, H. A. "The Reduction of Accidents in a Transport Company by the Determination of the Accident Liability of Individual Drivers," Traffic Safet Research Review, Vol. 5, No. L, December, 1 , pp. 2-I.[2. Stewart, Roger G. "Driving Exposure: What Does it Mean? How is it Measured?," Traffic Safet , June, 1960, ' pp. 9-1 0 Thomas, I. C. "Sioux Falls Transit is Safer," Public Safety, October, 1950, pp. 8-9. "10 Step ggfggy Program," Public Safety, September, 1958, pp. - o i , , "Urges Truckers to Share Know-How," Traffic Safety, July, 1963, p. 22. '“"“‘ . _ Williams, Frank M. "P-I-E's Safety Program Has the Personal Touch," Traffic Safet , November, 1963, pp. 21 plus. D. UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS Brody, Leon. "What We Really Know, Really Don't Know, and Really Ought to Know About Commercial Vehicle Drivers," (Address at the 23rd Annual Convention of the Greater New York Safety Council, March 25, 1953). Reproduced by' the Accident Prevention Department, Association of Casuglty and Surety Companies, 60 John Street, New York, New or . 8h Finch, A. C. "Motor Transportation Services," (address at the Institute for Safety Council Administration, National Safety Council, October l9-22, 196A). Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Council. Letter from the Dallas Police Department, Dallas, Texas, April, 1965. APPENDIX A FLEET SAFETY PROGRAM ACTIVITY QUESTIONNAIRE 85 FLEET SAFETY PROGRAM ACTIVITY QHESTIONNAIRE Code No. OPERATIONS - City Delivery 1. Average number of vehicles, 1955 thru 196A 2. Average number of drivers, 1955 thru 196A ,3. Type of vehicles operated [:3 Van type - under 6,000 lbs. D Van type - 6,000 to 14,000 lbs. D Other trucks, describe: 1.. Type of Operation 1:] Retail store delivery [:1 Home delivery C] Other, describe: . a. What percent of your operations is devoted to delivery to: . Retail stores Homes Other b. Have the operations changed from 1955 thru 196A? (i.e., geographical delivery areas, increased store or increased home delivery, etc. 5- Area of Operation [:3 Inside metropolitan area, including suburbs [:3 Inside city limits, not including suburbs D Other, describe: SELECT 86 Between what hours of the day do your drivers usually work? Retail store delivery drivers: Home delivery drivers: Other drivers: fi— Do you have a policy on the maximum hours a driver can work each day? - E] Yes I: No If yes, describe: Do your regular drivers cover the same assigned routes each week? - E] Yes D No Have any of the above Changed from 1955 thru 196A? E] Yes D No If yes, describe: SELECTION OF DRIVERS ‘ $1. 2. Is an applicant required to complete an application form? [3 Yes E] No Is the applicant interviewed? D Yes [:1 No If’yes, is a planned-interview checklist used giving .specific questions that are asked the applicant? - D Yes [3 No .Are the applicant's references and previous employers checked? . - 1:] Yes [:1 No Its the applicant's driving record checked through Ilocal or state government agencies? I: Yes :3 No 5. IL). ll. 12. 87 IS the applicant given a physical examination? [:1 Yes 1:] No Is the applicant given a behind-the-wheel driving test before being hired? 1:] Yes 1:] No If yes, is this test conducted: E] Over a given course [1 On-the-road [:1 Off-the-road D For a given length of time Is a driving check-list used for this test? D Yes D No A Is the applicant tested for traffic and driving knowledge by written test? D Yes [:I No Is the applicant tested for traffic laws and ordinances knowledge? ' Yes [:1 No List any other written tests given to applicant: Do you have age limits for driver applicants? E] Yes I] No If yes, what are the limits: Do you have minimum driving experience requirements? D Yes D No If yes, what are the requirements? Do you have minimum educational requirements? [:3 Yes [:1 No 13. 88 1:] High school 1:] Grade through the 8th grade B Other, describe: What is the average length of driving tenure with the company? ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROGRAMING l. 2. A. Who administers your accident prevention programing? (Give titIe oermponeef How much time per month is devoted to the administra- tion of the accident prevention pregram? D Full time [:3 Part time of time or hours? Do you define a Standard of Driving PerfOrmance for all drivers? 1:] Yes D No If yes, describe: Do you have a Driver Training procedure? I: Yes D No a. Initial driver training 1. Do all new driver-employees receive initial driver training? I] Yes. E] No 2. If no, what is the deciding factor for initial training? [:I No experience on type of vehicle company uses [3' No previous driving experience (any vehicle) [3' Initial behind-the-wheel test indicates need h. 5. 6. 7. 89 C] Other , describe : Who does the training? TTitIe of emponeeT Which of the following areas are covered in your initial training program? [I] Orientation (Job requirements, company policy, safety pragram, etc.) E:] Motor vehicle accident problem (e.g., major company accident types, major accident areas and types in these areas) Causes of traffic accidents (driver, vehicle, environment) Personal traits relating to safe driving (Physical and mental) The vehicle (operations of, limitations of, mechanical condition of) Traffic laws and regulations [JUDGE] Basic driving maneuvers Are new drivers accompanied by experienced men? [:1 Yes [:1 No If yes, prinCiple duty of the trainer is: [:3 Instruct new employee in route layout and work procedure Instruct new employee in safe driving techniques Are drivers instructed in a procedure to follow in case of accident? D Yes ' D No” How7many hours are devoted to initial train- ing - 5. 90 In the class room: hours On the route: hours 8. Is refresher training given to your drivers? [:1 Yes D No If yes: E] Annually D Other, describe: 9. Is remedial training, on the basis of accident experience, given to your drivers? [3 Yes D No b. Does a regularly scheduled flow of safety materials go to your drivers? DYes‘DNo If yes, do you employ any of the following: [:3 Special monthly driver magazines dis- tributed to drivers Monthly driver letters containing safe driving or defensive driving information Occasional booklets with safe driving or defensive driving information DUE] Safety posters on safe driving or ' defensive driving? How often Changed? [1 Bulletin boards U Safety meetings How often are they held? Do you have an Accident Record Keeping System? [J Yes D No b. d. e. f. 91 When did you start this system? (year) What is your definition of a reportable motor vehicle accident for your fleet accident records? Do you require your drivers to report all accidents regardless of cast, amount of damage, or personal injury? D Yes 1:] No Do you keep an accident register for all accidents? 1:] Yes D No Do you keep an accident analysis sheet? [3 Yes D No Do you analyze accidents to determine: [:| Primary accident types (head-0n, sideswipe, etc.) [3 Primary accident causes [3 Problem areas that might need special attention C] Other: Are accident rates computed for your fleet? 1:] Yes D No If yes, for your rate do you use accidents per: [1100.000 miles 1:] 1,000,000 miles 3 D Other, describe: If yes, to compute your fleet mileage figures, do you uSe: (may check more than one) C] Odometer readings i. k. 92 [:1 Trip records or route mileage D' Gasoline consumption 1:] Other, describe: Do you keep an individual driver accident record? 1:] Yes [:1 No Do you use your definition of a reportable accident for purposes of recording driver accidents on their individual driving records? 1:] Yes [:1 No If no, what accidents do you record? Do you Judge your driver's accidents as to whether or not they are preventable? D Yes D No Does your company have an accident review committee? I] Yes D No If yes, are both top.management and drivers on the committee? Yes D No If no, who serves on the committee? (TifiIes ofIEmponeesI How often does the committee meet? 6. Do you have a method for Recognizing S_a___fe Driving Performance? D Yes D No a. What type of recognition do you use? E] Safe driver awards (pins, cards, certificates) 1:] Cash or savings bond bonus I: Vacation trips 8. 93 E] Merchandise awards [:1 Special letters of Commendation C] Other, describe: b. Is this recognition based on operating without a preventable accident for a certain period of time? [:1 Yes D No Is "one year" the period of time used? [:1 Yes E] No If no, describe system: c. Are all accidents charged against the driver's safe driving record regardless if the accidents are preventable or not? D Yes 1:] No If no, only those accidents Judged preventable? D Yes 1:] No d. Is the recognition you use governed by rules to insure it is awarded only to those who measure up to your standard? 1:] Yes D No Do you have special campaigns aimed at specific types of accidents when they occur more frequently than usual? 1:] Yes' 1:] No Has any of the above accident prevention programing or procedure been changed from 1955 thru 196h?.- D Yes D No If yes, describe changes: 91+ VEHICLE,MAINTENANCE l. 2. h. 5. 7. Are your drivers required to perform pre-trip vehicle inspections? E] Yes [:1 No Are your drivers required to turn in vehicle per- formance sheets at the end of each day? [:1 Yes D No Are vehicles checked and repaired on the basis of driver repair orders or malfunction reports? D Yes 1:] No Is only the item written up by the driver checked and repaired or is the rest of the vehicle inspected for defects also? E]_ Only the item written is repaired (no further check) [3 Item is repaired and vehicle inspected Is a regularly scheduled preventive maintenance program in effect? D Yes [:1 No If yes, is this scheduled on the basis of: 1:] Mileage- I: Time Please describe the program. (Show what is done at what interval) Has this procedure remained the same from 1955 thru 1964? D Yes D No If no, describe changes: NUMBER OF REPORTABLE ACCIDENTS FLEET HAS EXPERIENCED 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 196A NUMBER OF MILES FLEET ACCUMULATED 1960. 1961 1962 1963 1964 95 APPENDIX B SAMPLE LETTERS USED IN STUDY 97 SAMPLE LETTER NO. 1 Dr. Walter A. Cutter Director Center for Safety Education New York University 6 Washington Square North New York, New York 10003 Dear Dr. Cutter: I am in the process of compiling a bibliography of studies and articles on commercial vehicle fleet safety programs. I am particularly interested in the following: 1. Research on the effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) of commercial vehicle fleet safety programs (or parts of programs). 2. Articles which describe commercial vehicle fleet safety programs and which report improvement (or no improvement) in accident experience and/or reduction in accident costs. I would very much appreciate any bibliographical information or, where possible, the actual material that you have in these two areas. Sincerely, walter D. weiss' 98 SAMPLE LETTER N0. 2 Dear Enclosed is the survey questionnaire which we discussed today in our telephone conversation. The extra copy is for your records if you wish. I am conducting this study in order to write my thesis in partial fulfillment for my Masters Degree work in Highway Traffic Administration from.Michigan State Univer- sity. Since the outcome of the study hinges primarily on the enclosed questionnaire and especially on obtaining accident and mileage information, I am particularly anxious to get these data, especially for your trucks involved in retail store and/or institutional deliveries in the Detroit metropolitan area. If you have other types of delivery such as to private homes and do not keep separate records for the different types of delivery, total figures will still be important. The definition of a reportable fleet accident for fleet records that I shall use is that of the American Standards Association, namely: "A motor vehicle fleet accident is any occurrence involving a fleet motor vehicle which results in death, injury, or property damage, unless such fleet vehicle is properly parked. Who was injured, what property was damaged or to what extent, where it occurred, or who was responsible is not a factor." If your accident data do not include all accidents except where properly parked please let me know what criteria were used. All information concerning specific companies and places will be held strictly confidential. Code numbers will be - assigned to individual companies for analyzing all data to insure strictest confidence. Any help you can give me on this will be deeply appreciated. self-addressed envelope is enclosed for returning the completed questionnaire. - - Sincerely, Walter D. weiss APPENDIX C SUMMARY OF QUESTIONNAIRE DATA 100 GRCUP l OPEh TIOhS - PAhT I l. 2. All companies Operate similar type vehicles. All but one company (4) deliver to retail stores. Company 4 delivers to institutions. Four other companies deliver to institutions also - (3, 13, 17, 19). All companies but number 4 deliver 90 per cent— or more to retail stores. Company 4 delivers only to institutions and restaurants. All companies deliver in the Detroit metropolitan area including suburbs within a 50 mile radius. All but one company (4) Operates within the hours of 5:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. All companies have policies on the maximum hours a driver can wOrk each day. Maximum hours vary from 8 to 12 hours. In all companies, the drivers cover the same routes each week. Two companies did not experience a change in their Operations during the ten-year study period - (13, 17). Four companies experienced a change in their lOl Operations. One company decreased deliveries to small stores and increased deliveries to super markets - (16). Three companies increased their delivery area - (3, 4, l9). SELECTION OF DRIVERS — PART II 1. 2. 3. All companies use application forms. All companies interview applicants. Three companies use a planned-interview check- list giving Specific questions that are asked the applicant - (4, 13, 19). Three companies do not use such a checklist - (3, 16, 17). All but one company (16) check references and previous employers. Three companies check applicants' driving records through local or state government agencies - (3. l3. 19). Three companies do not check driving records - (4, 16, 17). Three companies require applicants to take a physical examination - (3, 13, 16). Three companies do not - (4, 17, 19). 10. ll. 12. l3. 14. 102 Two companies give a driving test before hiring — (13, 19). Four companies do not give driving tests - (3. 4, l6, 17)- The two companies that give driving tests give them on the road in regular traffic. Neither of these companies uses a check-list for the road tests. None of the companies in Group 1 give traffic and driving knowledge tests. Neither do any of them give laws and ordinances knowledge tests. None give any other written tests to the applicants. All but one company (17) have age limits. None of the companies have minimum driving experience requirements. Four companies have minimum educational requirements - (3, 13, 17, 19). All of these require a high school education. Two companies do not have a minimum require- ments - (4, 16). The range of driving tenure for the companies in Group 1 is from 10 to 15 years ; an average of 11.8 years. 103 ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROGRAM - PART III 1.. Titles of administrators of the accident prevention programs Company 3 — Insurance company safety engineer Company 4‘- General Manager Company 13 - Agency Manager Company 16 - Local office manager Company 17 — Book keeper Company 19 - Safety Director of leasing company 2. A11 administrators Spend only part time on their accident prevention programs. Three of the six companies gave the per cent of their time spent on their programs as follows: .3 per cent; .6 per cent; and 2 per cent. The average is about 1 per cent of their time Spent on accident prevention. 3. One company has a standard of driving performance - (16). Any driver with excess violations is taken off the truck. Five companies have no standard of driving per- formance - (3. 4. 13, 17, 19). 4. No company has driver training for their new employees. 5. 10h Initial training programs include the following: a. Orientation (job requirements, company policy, safety program, etc.) - (3, l3, l7, 19) b. Motor vehicle accident problem (major company accident types, major accident areas and types in these areas) - (3, 19) c. Causes of traffic accidents (driver, vehicle, environment) - (3) d. Personal traits relating to safe driving (physical and mental) - (3) e. .The vehicle (Operations of, limitations of, mechanical condition of) - (3. 4, 17, 19) f. Traffic laws and regulations - (13) g. Basic driving maneuvers - (no companies) New drivers are accompanied by experienced men in five companies - (3, 4, 13, 17, 19). One company does not send experienced men with their new drivers - (l6). Principle duty of the trainer in each of the five companies is: (l) to instruct in route layout; and (2) to instruct in safe driving techniques. All companies instruct their new drivers in the procedure to follow in case of accident. 10. ll. 12. 13. 105 Time devoted to initial training: Classroom (includes across the desk orientation) Three companies - 0 hours (4, 16, 17) Two companies - 1 hour (3. 13) One company - 1 day (19) On the Route Two companies - 1 to 2 weeks (3, 19) Two companies - 2 to 3 days (l3, 17) One company - 1 week (4) One company - no time spent on route (16) No company gives refresher training to their drivers. One company gives remedial training on the basis of accident experience - (16). Five companies do not give remedial training - (3. 4, 13, 17, 19)- All companies reported use of a regularly scheduled flow of safety materials as fellows: a. Special monthly driver magazines distributed to drivers - one company (16) b. Monthly driver letters containing safe driving or defensive driving information - three (3. 16. 17) c. Occasional bOOklets with safe driving or defensive driving information - two companies (16, 19) 106 d. Safety posters on safe driving or defensive .driving - five companies (3, 4, 13, 16, 19) Three companies change them monthly - (3, 13, 16). One company changes them quarterly - (10). One company didn't indicate frequency — (4). e. Bulletin boards - four companies (3, 13, 16, 19) f. Safety meetings - five companies (3, 4, l3, l6, 19) Two companies hold meetings monthly - (4, 16). Two companies hold meetings quarterly - (3. 19). One company holds meetings annually - (13). Ju4. All companies have an accident record keeping system. Three companies started system prior to 1955 - (13, 16, 17). One company started system in 1959 - (19).' One company started system in 1960 - (4). One company started system in 1963 - (3). 3155. All companies have definitions of reportable accidents for their fleets. These definitions are similar, e.g., "All accidents regardless of l6. 17. 18. 19. 20.. 21. 22. 107 amount of damage, what prOperty was damaged, who. was injured or who was at fault." All companies require their drivers to report all accidents regardless of cost, amount of damage, or personal injury. All companies keep an accident register for all accidents. One company keeps an accident analysis Sheet - (16). Five companies do not - (3, 4, 13, l7, 19). One company analyzes accidents to determine primary types - (16). Two companies analyze accidents to determine primary causes - (17, 19). Three companies compute accident frequency rates - (13, 16, 19). Two commanies base rates on accidents per 100,000 miles - (13, 19). One company bases its rate on accidents per 1 million.miles - (16). Two companies compute their mileage figures“ from odometer readings - (13, 19). One company computes its mileage figures from route mileage - (l6). 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28» 108 Four companies keep individual driver accident records - (3, 4, 16, 19). Two companies put cOpies of accident reports in drivers' personnel folders but they are not entered on a continuing driver record card - (13, 17). Five companies put all driver accidents on their individual driving records - (3, 4, 13, 17, 19). One company did not respond to the question - (16).) Four companies judge accidents preventable or non-preventable - (3, 13, 16, 19). Two companies do not - (4, 17). Two companies have an accident review committee- (3, 16). Three companies do not have such a committee - (13, 17, 19). One company did not respond - (4). One company, both tOp management and drivers serve on the committee, and they meet after each accident - (3). One company has only top management on the committee which.meets monthly - (16). Three companies have a method foriscognizing safe driving performance - (13, 16, 17). 29. 30. 31. 320 33- 34. 109 Three companies do not recognize safe driving records - (3, 4, 19). Type of recognition used: Three companies use safe driver award pins - (13, 16, 17). One company also uses merchandise awards - (13). Two companies base their recognition on Operat- ing without a preventable accident for a one A year period - (13, 16). One company bases its recognition on Operating I. with no accidents what-so-ever for one year - (17). One company charges all accidents against the driver's safe driving record regardless if the accidents are preventabIe or not - (17). Four companies do not charge all accidents to drivers - (4, l3, 16, 19). One company did not respond to this question - (3).- Four companies charge only accidents found (Preventable against their drivers' records -. (4, 13, 16, 19). The three companies using awards base them on rules - (13, 16, 17). One company has Special campaigns aimed at 110 high frequency accident types - (19). Five companies do not have Special campaigns - (3. 4, 13, 16, 17). 36. Four companies reported that their safety programs did not change 1955 through 1964 - (4, 13, 16, 19). Two companies indicated-their safety programs changed during this period - (3, 17). Company 3 - Driver letter introduced in 1964; safety meeting frequency was increased Company 17 - Safe driver awards were introduced in 1963. ‘VEHICLE MAINTENANCE - PART IV 1. Two companies require their drivers to perform pre-trip vehicle inepections - (13, 19). Four companies do not require pre-trip inspections v (3. 4, l6, l7). 2. Only one company requires drivers to turn in vehicle performance sheets at the end of each day - (16). One company requires such reports on a weekly basis - (l3). . Three companies require vehicle performance reports only when a defect occurs - (3, 17, 19). 6. 111 One company does not require any vehicle performance report — (4). All companies repair vehicles on the basis of driver repair orders or malfunction reports. All companies repair item written up and also check vehicles for other items not written up. Five companies have a regularly scheduled preventive maintenance program in effect - (3. 4, 13. 16, 19). One company does not have such a program - (17). One company has their PM program on a mileage basis - (13). Three companies have PM programs on mileage and time basis - (4, 16, 19). One company has its PM program on time basis only - (3). ' One company has no PM program scheduled.- (17). Three companies - their preventive maintenance programs remained the same from 1955 through' 1964 - (13, 16, 19). Two companies - their programs changed during this time - (3, 4). One company reported that their program changed but did not state how. 112 Company 3 - In 1960 a full time mechanic was hired. Prior to this, gas stations did the work. Company 4 - In 1963, a comprehensive PM . program was begun. Prior to this, only defects were repaired by outside agency. 113 GROUP 2 OPERATIONS --PART I 1. Each of the three companies in Group 2 Operates different types of vehicles. Company 6 - Vans under 6,000 lbs. Company 8 - Vans under 6,000 lbs. and vans 6,000 to 14,000 lbs., mostly the later (over 80 per cent) Company 12 - Tractor, semi-trailer units only 2. All three companies deliver 100 per cent to retail stores. 3. All companies deliver in the Detroit metrOpolitan area including suburbs within a 50 mile radius. 4. Hours of operation vary considerably. The range is 1:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Company 6 - Operates from 7:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Company 8 - Operates 50 per cent of the fleet from 1:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. and 50 per cent of the fleet from 6:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Company 12 - Operates from 3:30 a.m. to 12 noon. 5. Two companies have policies on the maximum hours a driver can work each day - (8, 12). One company has no policy on maximum work hours - (6). 114 Maximum hours - 8 hours for both companies. In two companies, the drivers cover the same assigned routes each week - (6, 8). In one company, drivers change routes period- ically - (12). In all three companies, the Operations changed during the ten years Of the study. All three increased the size of their delivery area. SELECTION OF DRIVERS - PART II 1. 2. 3. All companies use application forms. All companies interview applicants. One company uses a planned-interview checklist giving Specific questions that are asked the applicant - (6). Two companies do not use such a checklist - (a, 12). N All companies check references and previous' employers. None of the companies check the applicant's driving record through local or state govern- ment agencies. All companies require applicants to take a physical examination. 7. 8. 115 Two companies give a driving test before hiring - (6, 8)- One company hires only men inexperienced in truck driving - (12). One company gives the driving test on the road - (6). The other company did not indicate where their driving test was given - (8). None of the companies in Group 2 give traffic and driving knOwledge tests. 9.Neither do any of them give laws and ordinances 10. 11. 212. knowledge tests. One company gives an arithmetic test - (6). Two companies do not give any other written tests - (8, 12). One company has age limits set for hiring drivers - (12). The applicant must be 21.or over. Two companies have no applicant age limits - (6. 8). One company has minimum driving experience requirements - (6). ‘ Two companies do not have minimum requirements - <8. 12). 116 Minimum driving experience required by Company 6 is the applicant must have a chauffeurs license. 13. All companies have minimum educational require- ments; a high school education. 14. The range of driving tenure for the companies is from 12 to 20 years: an average of 15 years. ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROGRAM - PART III 1. Titles of administrators of the accident prevention programs: Company 6 - Stock foreman Company 8 - None ‘ Company 12 - Garage manager 2. All administrators spend only part time on their accident prevention programs. Company 6 - 5 per cent Company 8 - none Company 12 - 5 per cent 3. Two companies define a standard of driving performance - (6, 12). 1 One company does not define such a standard - (8). Company 6 - Driver is told what is expected: (1) smooth Operation; and (2) safe Operation. 117 Company 12 - Courteous driving, care for equipment and the company, and safe Operation. , 4. One company has driver training - (12). Two companies have no formal driver training program - (6, 8). 5. One company gives driver training to all drivers - (12). Two companies do not give driver training to all new drivers - (6, 8). 6. Deciding factor for driver training: Company 6 - No new employees receive driver training. Company 8 - Only those men with no experience on the type of equipment the company uses are trained. Company 12 - All new driver employees are given driver training. 8 '7. Company 8 - An eXperienced regular driver rides with sOme new drivers and coaches them. Company 12 - The superintendent of Shipping and Warehouse trains each new driver on the company equipment. 8. 90 10. 118 Initial training programs include the following: a. g. 'Orientation (job requirements, company policy, safety program, etc.) - (all companies) Motor vehicle accident problem (i.e., major company accident types, major accident areas and types in these areas) - (6) _ Causes of traffic accidents (driver, vehicle, environment) - (6) Personal traits relating to safe driving (physical and mental) - (6, 12) The vehicle (Operations of, limitations of, mechanical condition of) - (all companies) Traffic laws and regulations - (no companies) Basic driving maneuvers - (8, 12) New drivers are accompanied by experienced men in all companies in Group 2. In two companies the duty of the trainer is: (1) to instruct in route layout; and (2) to¢ instruct in safe driving techniques - (8, 12). In one company the duty of the driver trainer is only to instruct new employees in safe driving techniques - (6). 119 11. All companies instruct their new drivers in the procedure to follow in case of accident. 12. Time devoted to initial training: Classroom (includes across the desk orientation) Company 6 - 1 hour Company 8 - 0 hours Company 12 - unknown On-the-Route Company 6 - 3 weeks Company 8 - 1 week . Company 12 - unknown 13. No company gives refresher training to their drivers. 14. One company gives remedial training on the basis of accident experience - (12). Two companies do not give remedial training - (6, 8). 15. Two companies reported use of a regularly scheduled flow of safety materials as follows - (6, 12): a. Special monthly driver magazines distributed to drivers - (no company) i b. Monthly driver letters containing safe driving or defensive driving information - (no company) 16. 17. 18. .19. 120 c. Occasional booklets with safe driving 'or defensive driving information - (6, 12) d. Safety posters on safe driving or defensive driving - (6. 12) Company 6 - changes posters monthly Company 12 - changes posters weekly e. Bulletin boards - (6, 12) f. Safety meetings - (6, 12) Company 6 - holds meetings monthly Company 12 - holds meetings bi-monthly All companies have an accident record keeping system. Company 6 - started its system in 1953 Company 8 - unknown when system started Company 12 started its system in 1956 All companies have definitions of reportable accidents for their fleets. These definitions are similar, e.g., "all accidents regardless of amount of damage, what preperty was damaged, who was injured or who was at fault." All companies require their drivers to report all accidents regardless of cost, amount of damage, or personal injury. A Two Companies keep an accident register for all accidents - (8, 12). 20. 21. 22. 23., 24. 25. 121 One company does not keep such a register - (6). A11 cOmpanies keep an accident analysis sheet. Two companies analyzed accident to determine primary types - (8, 12). One company analyzes accidents to determine primary causes - (6). One company analyzes accidents to determine. Special problems - (12). One company analyzes accidents to determine fault - (6). All companies compute accident frequency rates. Company 6 stepped computing rates in 1961. One company bases its rates on accidents per 1 million miles - (12). One Company bases its rate on accidents per quarter: a time basis - (8). One company did not indicate the base they use - (6). 7 Two companies compute their mileage figures from odometer readings - ( 8, 12 ). Two companies keep individual driver accident records - (6, 12). Company 6 discontinued record in 1959. I f One company does not keep such a record - (8). 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 122 Two companies put all driver accidents on their drivers individual driving records - (6, 12). Company 6 stOpped in 1959. Two companies judge accidents preventable or non-preventable - (6, 12). One company does not judge accidents - (8). Two companies have an accident review committee - (6, 12). ' One company does not have such a committee - (8). One company has both tOp management and drivers on the committee which meets monthly - (12). One company has only tap management on the committee which meets every one or two months - (6). Two companies, (6, 12), recognize safe driving performance, however, Company 6 discontinued their recognition program in 1959. One company does not have a recognition program - (8). Type of recognition used: One company uses safe driver award pins - (6). Two companies use cash bonuses - (6, 12). One company uses merchandise awards - (6). Two companies base their recognition on Operating without a preventable accident for a one year 123 period - (6, 12). 32. Company 6 uses one year as the time period for awards. Company 12 uses 6 months as the time period for awards. 33. Companies 6 and 12 do not charge all accidents against their drivers' records. 34. Both companies charge drivers.only with prevent- able accidents. 35.’ Companies 6 and 12 have rules governing their awards. 36. Two companies have Special campaigns aimed at high frequency accident types - (6, 12). One cbmpany does not have special campaigns - (8). 37. Two companies reported that their safety programs did not change from 1955 through 1964 - (8, 12).. One company indicated their safety program changed during this period - (6). Company 6 discontinued driver records and~ safe driver awards in 1959. VEHICLE MAINTENANCE - PART IV 1. All companies require their drivers to perform pro-trip vehicle inspections. 2. No company requires drivers to turn in vehicle 12A performance Sheets at the end of each day. All Companies repair vehicles on the basis of driver repair orders or malfunction reports. All companies repair items written up and also check vehicles for other items not written up. All companies have a regularly scheduled preven- tive maintenance program in effect. All companies base their preventive maintenance program on both mileage and time. All companies - their preventive programs have remained the same from 1955 through 1964. 125 GROUP 3 OPERATIONS - PART I 1. Two companies Operate van type trucks 6,000 lbs. or under - (9. 14)- One company Operates van type trucks, 6,000 lbs. to 14,000 lbs. - (11). Two companies Operate both type van trucks,. 6,000 lbs. and 6,000 to 14,000 lbs. - (5, 10). 2. All companies deliver to retail stores. Companies 9, 10, and 11 - 100 per cent Company 5 - 90 per cent retail and 10 per cent other 8 Company 14 - 75 per cent retail and 25 per cent restaurants 3. All cOmpanieS deliver in the Detroit metrOpolitan area including suburbs within a 50 mile radius. 4.. Hours of Operation for the companies in Group 3 range around the clock (24 hours a day), but the majority make deliveries from 4:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Company 5 - 90 per cent 4:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 10 per cent 11:00 p.m. to 12 noon Company 9 - 100 per cent' 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Company 10 - 100 per cent 6:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. 5. 126 Company 11 - 100 per cent 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.. Company 14 - 75 per cent 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. 25 per cent 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Two companies have a policy on the maximum hours a driver can work each day - (9, 14). Maximum hours vary from 7 to 9. Three companies have no policy on maximum hours - (5, 10, 11). In all companies the drivers cover the same routes each week. Four companies experienced no changes in their Operations during the ten-year study period - (5. 10, 11, 14). One company experienced a change - (9). At one time, drivers could stay out on the route as long as they wished. Now they can stay out only 7 hours. SELECTION OF DRIVERS_- PART II 1. 2. 3. All companies use application forms. All companies interview applicants. Two companies use a planned-interview checklist giving specific questions that are asked the applicant - (9, 10). Three companies do not use such a checklist - (5. 11, 14). 127 All companies check references and previous employers. Three companies check applicants' driving records through local or state government agencies - (5, 9, 10). Two companies do not check driving records - (ll, 14). All companies require applicants to take a physical examination. Two companies give driving tests - (9, 10). Three companies do not give such tests - (5, 11, 12). Both companies that give driving tests give them on the road in regular traffic. ‘ Company 9 uses a check-list for the test. Company 10 does not use a check-list. Two companies give traffic and driving knowledge tests - (5, 9). Three companies do not give this type tests - (10, ll, 14). Three companies give laws and ordinances tests - (5. 9. 10). Two companies do not give this type tests - (ll, 14). I 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 128 Two companies give other written tests - (5, 9). Company 5 - Wonderlicht Personality Test Company 9 — 1.0. and Sales Aptitude Tests Three companies do not give other written tests - (10, 11, 14). Two companies have age limits - (9, 10). Company 9 hires no one over 25. Company 10 hires only applicants between 21 to 30. Three companies have not set age limits - (5, ll, 14). One company has minimum driving experience 'requirements however did not state what the requirements were - (10). -Four companies do-not set minimum driving experience requirements - (5, 9, 11, 14). Two companies have minimum educational require- ments - (5, 14). Both companies require av high school education. Three companies do not have such a require-c ment - (9. 10, 11). The range of driving tenure for the companies in Group 3 is from 10 to 25 years; an average of 16.4 years. 129 ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROGRAM - PART III 1. Titles of administrators of the accident prevention programs Company 5 - Personnel Manager Companies 9, ll - Fleet Superintendent Company 10 - Safety Director Company 14 - Sales Manager All administrators Spend only part time on their accident prevention program. Companies 5, 9 - 1.5 per cent of time Company 10 - 50 per cent of time Company 11 5 per cent of time Company 14 - 2 per cent of time Two companies have a standard of driving performance defined - (9, 10). Company 9- more than three accidents in 5 years, the driver is subject to dismissal. Company 10 - Accident free or low accident driving Three companies have no such standard of driving - (5. 11, 14). Two companies have driver training - (5. 10). Three companies do not - (9, 11, 14). 130 Two companies — all new drivers get driver training in basic Skills - (5. 10). Three companies - no drivers get training in the basic driving skills - (9. 11, 14). Company 5 - the Sales Supervisor does the driver training. Company 10 - the driver supervisor does the training. Initial training programs include the following: a. Orientation (job requirements, company policy, safety program, etc.) - (all companies) Motor vehicle accident problem (i.e., major company accident types, major accident 'areas and types in theS areas) - (all companies) Causes of traffic accidents (driver, vehicle, environment) - (5. 9, 10, 14) Personal traits relating to safe driving (physical and mental) - (5, 10) The vehicle (Operations of, limitations of, mechanical condition of) - (5. 9, 10) Traffic laws and regulations - (5, 9, 10) Basic driving maneuvers - (5. 10) 131 8. New drivers are accompanied by experienced men in all the companies in Group 3. 9. In four companies, the principle duty of the trainer is: (1) to instruct in route layout; and (2) to instruct in safe driving techniques - (5. 9, 10, 14). In one company the trainer's principle duty is to instruct only in route layout - (11). 10. All companies instruct their new drivers in the procedure to follow in case of accident. 11. Time devoted to initial training: Classroom (includes across the desk orientation) Company 5 - 4 hours i . Company 9 - 1% hours Companies 10, 11 - none Company 14 - 1 hour One the Route Company 5 - l to 2 weeks Company 9 - 9 weeks Companies 10, 11 - 2 weeks Company 14 - 1 week 12. One company gives refresher training to their drivers - (5). The driver supervisor rides with each driver once each quarter. 130 14. 132 Four companies give no refresher training - (9, 10, 11, 14). All companies give remedial training on the basis of accident experience. All companies reported use of a regularly scheduled flow of safety materials as follows: a. Special monthly driver magazines dis- tributed to drivers - (no companies) b. Monthly driver letters containing safe driving or defensive driving information - (no companies) c. Occasional booklets with safe driving or defensive driving information -' (all companies) ‘ d. Safety posters on safe driving or defensive driving - (all companies) Three cOmpanieS change them monthly - (5. 9. 10). One company changes them bi-monthly - (14). One company - the frequency of change is unknown - (11). -e. Bulletin boards - (9, 10, ll, 14) 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 133 f. Safety meetings - (5. 9, 10, 14) One company holds meetings monthly - (5). Two companies hold meetings quarterly - (10, 14). V One company holds meetings semi-annually - (9). All companies have an accident record keeping system. One company started system in 1955 - (5). One company started in 1929 - (9). One company started system in 1957 - (10). One company started in 1963 - (11). One company started in 1955 - (14). All companies have Similar definitions of reportable accidents for their fleets, e.g., "All accidents regardless of amount of damage, what preperty was damaged who was injured or who was at fault." All companies require their drivers to report all accidents. Four companies keep an accident register for all accidents - (5. 9. 10, 11). One company does not keep such a register - (14). One company keeps an accident analySiS Sheet - (5). 134 Four companies do not keep an accident analysis sheet - (9, 10, 11, 14). 20. All companies analyze accidents to determine primary types. Three companies analyze accidents to determine primary causes - (5, 10, 14). Four companies analyze accidents to determine special accident problems - (5, 10, ll, 14). 21. Three companies compute accident frequency rates - (5, 10, 11). Two companies do not compute rates - (9, 14). 22. Two companies did not indicate the mileage base used to determine frequency rate - (5, 10). One company bases its rate on accidents per 100,000 miles - (ll). '23. Four companies compute their mileage figures from odometer readings - (5, 9, 11, 14). One company computes mileage figures from route mileage - (10). 24. Four companies keep individual driver accident records - (5, 9, 10, 11). One company puts copies of accident reports in drivers' personnel folders but they are not entered on a continuing driver record card - (14). 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 135 All companies put all driver accidents on their individual driving records. All companies judge accidents preventable or non-preventable. Four companies have an accident review committee - (5. 9. 10, 14). One company does not have such a committee - (11). Two companies, both tOp management and drivers serve on the committee - (5, 9). Two companies have only tOp management on the committee - (10, 14). Accident review committees meet: Companies 5, 10 - After each accident Company 9 - Monthly Company 14 - Every two weeks if accidents occur that frequently All companies have a method for recognizing safe driving performance. Type of recognition used: Four companies use safe driver award pins - (5. 9. 10, ll). 1 Three companies use merchandise awards - (5. 9. 14). Two companies use special letters of commendation - (5. 9). 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 136 All companies base recognition on driving with- out preventable accidents. Four companies use one year as the award time period - (5. 9. 10, 11). None of the companies charge all accidents against drivers' records. 3 All companies charge only preventable accidents against drivers. Four companras base their recognition program on rules - (9. 10, ll, 14). One company does not have set rules for their recognition program - (5)._ Two companies conduct Special emphasis campaigns against high frequency accident types - (9. 14). Three companies do not conduct such campaigns - (5, 10, 11). Two companies reported that their safety programs did not change 1955 through 1964 - (5. 9). ' Two Companies indicated their safety programs changed during this period - (10, 14). Company 10 - Safe driver award program was Spotty 1955 to 1958. 137 In 1959, full safe driver award program me started. 1957 - posters and bulletins were started. 1957 - safety director was appointed. Company 14 - More attention to program in later years was indicated. However no further details were given. One company did not respond to question - (11). VEHICLE MAINTENANCE - PART IV_ 1. Three companies require their drivers to perform pre-trip vehicle inSpectionS - (5, 10, 14). Two companies do not require pre-trip inspections - (9, ll). 2. Only one company requires drivers to turn in vehicle performance Sheets at the end of each day - (11). Three companies require vehicle performance reports only when a defect occurs - (5. 9, 14). One company does not require any vehicle performance report - (10). 3. All companies repair vehicles on the basis of driver repair orders or malfunction reports. 138 Four companies repair the item written up and also check vehicles for otheritems not written up - (9, 10, 11, 14). One company repair only the item written Up — (5). All companies have a regularly scheduled preventive maintenance program. Four companies base their preventive maintenance program on both mileage and time - (9, 10, ll, 14). One company bases their PM program only on mileage - (5). Three companies - their preventive maintenance programs remained the same from 1955 through 1964 - (5, 9, 10). Two companies - their programs changed during this time period - (ll, 14). Company 11 - changed in 1963 but gave no indication of what the change was. Company 14 - in 1960, company began renting trucks and rental agency per- forms all maintenance. APPENDIX D QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE TABLES OPERATIONS L PART I Emmy TYPE TYPE. 'PE‘RQEMT ”5:pgR.p\Tgom% AREA DORK wing/£0 03:: OF CHANGED 0? B @550 MA I U P / .4 h O7: 0?— ET O'PE'R-ATIOUS CHAUCVE‘D . %"5 Hfi’ooqfv‘l‘iésl cob: ‘3” o VEWCLE OPERM'iom BERRY-IOU 955" ”763* QEMT'ON wHNt" Hooks 'PQUTES l. bumssre u, m {05 ~ 5371A”) DETROIT Hoaxes OF m as; 55 J 9% M J m if Jw w ‘r F' memo THE 13w VJ"? x/Es IF WES / no- P 7 m .. or 1” m — p! m yes ' m YES MO Lu ’Y V55 ’00 EXPLNM. {I gp? g §§ I 4 O E I 40 E I V53 I LUDHOE; >§ 31;) 3 p ‘ ‘ p b r- o +— t; p o 5 Sosoass 2 2 u‘ 1* 0 a V7 4: 0 F5 ‘0 ‘F '5 9 i -- :1:::':1:::‘:; Cf": "w ’ WWW-W” :Z: mm- ' _,. ..... l "I... , I: P - , W a 7 o '2 / /J M) /O L// ‘/ “Eb/T 98% 02 A v./ 7Am. - 7pm. \/ HRS. I . _ M. :DETLlVERY Twonwgru’bep, maswdzts IDCQCAAED 55E LAST . c EQ‘FLEfi-Xbib ° 7'5OA 'I— To SMALLER 6T0“ $ TD MP H // w” L/ [005 ‘/ COLUMU / 53:; 10m. 1/ “Egg; L/ / mo M\'_E.AC=|E QHAMC’IE (,0 . K [DC—Rggslgb wEUVERV AREA ‘TO / o / SEE LRsT‘ 7601\nd. __ IO “QC LUDE METROPOLITALJ AXEA /7 H H \/ / HOST. 907; /O/0 ,/ CoLumo / 5:00pm. / H726 ‘/ . ”" P 55?: LAST 1 LARGER) :DELJVE'RV ARE—‘3' 4 /;2_ q \/ “0,577 [0070 l/ Qoulmw (/ 3AM.“(0 p.m. / 8 / MORE: TD‘RHJE'RS A‘DDED V‘s—.1. a...” k ...~ * “. 153651" HRé' u..- ‘M V - .— \I AREA. AFTETR 3 H NJ \/ l/ ”Dr 9070 ,07; / Gown“) / 5’Am.-5Pm. / ”is. / / use; ‘/ o m —— 473/7). ‘3 l7 l4 )9. / ‘/ ”bf 937,3 02/ L/ 6A / HES. / A WWW“ ./ 35E ”‘3' , LAPGER ’DELLQERV AREA 1 1545 (7 7 \/ t/ “:33; 9070 [05, ‘/ €01,me / 8Ama5zmm. / / (/ k / a . 0? his /1. 9‘ v/ \/ [us:azz 34 V/ V/ gAm—arz m L// V/ 5' IO 7 . / L// 3m~»—:n3mmw V/ L/ / / mg, l/ l h / 565’ LAST‘ LARG‘ER ‘DELH/B’RV AREA 0 ’ .. )Z I , /.2 so 55 m a We / Wm /. 36mm...) M 35 / L/ . 58 / ’00» 5AM (arm HOG?) ‘ . _. . A H Rest . L \O .. 8 ' 55: leT 53% 8AM 8 / LARGER fDELu/ER/ mask 3 66 é‘o IOO'o QQLL'mw 3:“ ' / A / \/ / / / / ~{gigs '_‘-—-3Pm, / HES. V L V i. w.-- OPERATIONS _ PART I “ M. TYPE TYPE ~ Cg ‘7’ Q’PETQ' 0/05“ A'RE‘R wé'RK ’fiNlICY’oU éévgg CZ”? u or c;- 7>E§F N CflAJ ED ? o=FI BETLJEE/Q maximum SAME GPERJpq-x-‘\OD$ QWNQGVED'? 4 03) £23m 0w VEH’CLE VEHICLE opgRAT/om 1955~ [9&4 91>ER‘KHOL“ Lawn“ HOURS Roma-s 955 meooq—H \qb tomes - , _._, _. HQ URS - U.) ..'. C, x" W xfiLAypth‘T’ROIT OF m {f4 mu jTEIJ 4111 m a: W m (K E “ ‘ \09 it 3’55 539 3)? O 0 3 GE “ i ”J ‘1‘! E L” YEs no "9 ' ”20’ THE D“ V55 NO “‘91 Y“ ’00 W5 ”0 ewpuwo .’ SI '1; (K O 0 0 Lu E I fi 0 I YES INCLUDIMGg 7‘0 3L)” 3 g 0,‘ 0‘ 52. E Lu W 39 \— LLJ t5 0 F’ SoEsLJRBs #3 l. HEW?LW§MA2< 0 fl 0 M I O —n ,WWMWWWWIWM --... it-..“ hm..- .m. _..:Z'TITTT;::_I;W.. warm“: ' _“W‘W ,"‘ W '“’ a ;;‘.,.,.~,,w; Mi Mi...” SHORTER wORLL Hogks _ — SAT 3“? ‘ ~ E‘Kg OULD TA. 00 q ICC) 115 \// / KID‘Z) l/ / 8AM 44201 ,/ H; / \/ lamiw‘zkg‘; THEY TDCéHEE’b. ID ICC) 195 \/ / / 1007. \/ / éAm’L’ZM' / (/ \/ 55: LAST 7.30 «m M0 MBE‘K 0R WROQT ES IMQE€A$E2D ’ o . ' _ \l 5! EA 6 [05 [05 VI/ \/ [€04 l/ Collumu / ’7130 :Rm. (/ l/ \/ LATRthR DEL.\ 5‘9. At an -wv«-..~1.». ._.,.-.._,\. ’mv \/ 75% 4 p .-M.....,.-_,~.--.—.‘ ah)..-“- .v«-.- .4... q ‘ awn ~ .130 m- . “4 Ms? M / as»; V/ (9 V/ r 5 t/ / 295T.“ 75% 25% \/ t/ [073”, —é~»\m. H736. \/ _ —~ . 4, Am —5’Pm // M5 A53 / / ‘ “>04 / a ./ / - / "EPA 5”) :JOAM-— 5 /50 //5 V/ / / If“ 70% /OZ ‘/ / ,0 yo / / / 2'63“. I / PM— I 2. Moog 0"71' 'SELECTION OF DRIVERS - PART II’ Commmk1 LAprtobcnod :mV/zzw wrung!»'Rtvzéumcdfiamwufi P‘HYS'CALB‘RWNCR "‘ )‘W'Qq Ziefégijk’fwc‘ ““5 f’ J 0TH E'P's { amt-.E m” '47 yéé‘, ggxguqm' wow”? Cone 7FO'R’M CHEQKUM v6.1, Reconb cka T‘EST GNED '-. wHEKFT. :bmwgc‘ '33?“qu OU‘NKNCL? (Qumran mes Lomq‘ 2:792:12:ch mu: (3 w t- W 75" . . me‘rs #55 NO 756 go yes no yrs .00 yes Do yas no 5’55 100 :5 E 4 fig; 1:113”! ygs Mo yzss zoo V55 90 W35 no yes Do F'o 0 >3 I ‘c ' § 395.56ka5 mmwmrawmw. 4 "W- _ 3” 0p: 5‘73 PF _, -..W, -...-. ...... m..-“ .., ...... ‘ - ,_ “EE’L‘VMHMNL «may I 5 \/ ‘/ / / / / / / - / / MoroE ./ 35— / ~ Eéfgfi’aqr ...-. “....“ 2! l (o / !/ / / \/ \/ \/ / / Moos: / cm \/ OVER _ ‘21-45’ I? t»/ ‘/ ' \/ \/ \/ \/ L/ \/ / (00:05 \/ EXCEWIons ‘/ ..., 55 W. 5L / \/ / \/ \/ \/ \/ / MODE \/ DLJDEST ‘/ QI-lLS 3 / x/ / / w M V /_ Row / WWW / / 7 t/ x/ / u/ \/ L/ ‘/ l/ / Mom: / / . / ARsTHmenc goal-3G! 12 I 55 / / ./ \/ / ‘/ \/ / / l/ TEST L \/ ame‘kxEDCt-Z / * Annamaria , a! * 7' 00E I54, / / / \/ / (/ / / / TEST / Dig-2E1; YEAR / WrrrozoE .959 ‘ [WM M - ,5— / / / / / / - / w - / Wm / _ } a/ "la. / / / l/ \/ NA HIRE M!E)U>ER)EMCED MEN NA NA ~/ uSEER / ; AMI) TRML)" - '- — . .‘ %/ "Norm:- . l I . ,, 8 ’/ / ~/ \/ / \/ l/ ‘/ no“); .\/ ‘/ l . , I . ’SELECTION OF DRIVERS - PART II Commm/ Awucmoo .m’ERV/eTo mmwgw REFEREoccs 17¢:ng W45 ’CAL Bmvvflé. FF “DRWI'OG: CHECKUS’ ‘hwgnc, ”“195 ‘ OTHER ’6'“: ’F YES' mwfmum (max-r- W Com;— “-Fcrqm cuccfiuar qpér RCmb 5'ka TEST qmau —‘L;.>HERE?. mfifiER 3212 i106, 0:33;ng ”R’TTE'Q “rm-rs L122: Eigfirj ARE '\ \ L KUmBE’R’ Egret—(1251:: CHECKED REQO‘RED OWE") "rES‘r‘q KATJOEgggTDQE K7525? 756725 LumITs WU‘RE‘D mmnmomc W..- m Lu ’1 w '3 ~ ’ 555 Do V55 DO YES 00 YES 00 >455 MO YES 00 3455 Do Ep 3:? (51%? E a? YE: '00 YES I00 5’55 00 F755 #50 #35 100 u 0 3 ‘ - _w 32 5A! 008 f‘ g pascmse ...:‘.::: '::::;i: .:::7 .:::::f‘“.;::';::::.:: «3:: 72:1: ‘5‘ ” T1 3:: ’5- - --"-~:~3r: ‘ - r ‘ ‘ I Q 7Z5),- WT 9 / ./ / / / / / / HOUR / / / $555 / own \/ “VN~"“_W. thrr “,555ww. . _ :5- 3,- IO / / / / / / / 33> w / / wows / so / L“ KROTHMETIC - é) -/ / / ./ / / / / / / / Tzsr‘ l/ / ,4 l/ / / / / / \/ / DOME ./ t/ r r- warm- .. — -—.-—.—- .—-—- 7 // / / . / ./ / / / / / mo: / / \..... / / (Oommmur / 7“ WWW 5 l/ '/ \/ t/ ‘/ \/ ‘/ TEDT‘ / SELECTION OF DRIVERS - PART II (continued) Mmmon own war. manage * UCA‘ruoN mum.mums TEMURE t¢omcmr o? ' D‘RNER no Seams 5155 DO fik:v¥“‘€sfi QTH‘K 3H0.“ scum. / l5 ... F'W'ofl -_ :-‘ n—r-VVIvv—a ‘ ‘.‘,,_¢,~-,..- ”um /4 /C? \\ \a momma or: mm. MO \ \~\ \ {‘71: /£§ SELECTION OF DRIVERS 4'PART II (Continued) ’erQIMum (Duh-CV ARE Average- {DOC-«170:0 MTMTn’xumg TEUORE “REQUImEm OF ‘ ZDRNE‘R ID .....- (TRADE HIGH OTHER VERRé y$ Ab sSC-firOL JCHOOL ~M— %”“.I W-m‘w 'Wu *4m..v~;f-~~ / /7 / O25 ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROGRAM 4. PART III - - “v VISUTY— TRAIDMSQ ' - Ntw IF NO. WHAT L...) pun— IS COVERED Expzmemfl ,m srmmo.) HAVE ALL 05 m Commov ammmsrnmcms TEE/0T5!) OF IF VES 35R\VER bkwgns L5 FACTOR?- ‘ WHO 1306‘ 33 'QWIAL 1"“wa \QG’ raise or ReszTNG; Cope; TITLE To mlwms. LOHKT Timmmfi «‘3; TRAN ' J, wru NEW TRA‘NER mwems V) numBER 'Pqumkm "PERFD'KMADC‘ n5 ‘1‘ R é’ 3 T TTL. E 3 J) [6 I— ? 2 g 3 ERNERS MW --..-fi STABDNED “~0qu akin! ; \T U‘ 513 M OR I?- l' g r 9 J 3 If} ¢ g J” F g. *4“? 9L “1 NITIOD- “ 7 .0" 3W” QJ U‘) U\ I'M Julé o “:2:; 3'73 I 5 3% $9 3” “‘3 a? ‘25.: '50 IL? pg JE 03 Yes NO YES” V53 “03650,; fig '5 5 g! 33 2:; 15 (3 2&9 x/EsNo g; 4P! YESIUO gig _ a E o\I -. MW” 20 > 99 A q) o < 9 LL FL '1 *7 J O {99:} I---” ‘09 ...“... ...... AQEMCA/ ' “fl /,. L/ / l5 "WNW—15R \/ —/ L/ L/ / [\OC AL— D’Q\\1 E‘R Ls) \TH / I QFTICET EKQE—bb / /<0 MAMG‘QER \/ \/ xlsiztéookfi ‘6 \/ [/ ROCK 5A?€‘T“\7'“'“"” L l/j . ‘ —- . r v :DOEFEC'TOK IL 0 / / / /I / /’ / / / /q LEAauDCq \/ .3/0 Com’PAOV A...” -... QévéRf-‘xL— ...--." WWW , L 4 MANAQEQ \/ E7 / / / \/ ‘/ I a ....WWW '73"S'O'Rkvoc€ I“ / 3 2:33;“ \/ 5.2% / O‘DERLXTlOKBS (ZED ERNIE? / \/ / / E ER\:5 [517 $0?EKYI$OR \/ [70’ ‘/ ‘/ \/ 3>R\\(E1=\ / (/ / (/ / L70. OFT—“nae: \/ OPERK’YIOTOb - ’5» {jg-pawl IsoR “,1 \/ / \_/ M E/ / L SDDEK\R\:J§‘:q11>2\égk$ T5 FINGER? T‘RAWQHQQ? nan-mu. TRM‘OUQCR “we QémRTIQ Is I R“ ‘ _. "PROG‘RAM EDRn/ER n —r‘|T'L_ :— u- “ a.) .TH UéU AQQTDEUT: A) _ w a Q Q 0 u I0 J 2 A OMB“ 5TAom-Rb TTmewq {3,33}: 033 «1% OR o 15: o 2 $2. ; ‘3 2, m) DRIVERS J 1L 5) 3 2 _ ’1 u a? 2 I— };w 3%0 Y 55.19%”; s33 Poe‘m’") g HIPBPA w‘i * 9% P 0 V3.- (E 3~o E5 V TINA! ”P 5040‘7I‘1Et8 ’ik/Esto 9M? YES/Lb m-..-......_..,_.__._‘,-,f_,,_. 20 > 29 A n o «r P Q 4 (H. .4 > ‘5 A V) 4 g _. - -A. .m",. ......f... _ ' :w " "'"“""' " "‘" I HE r MORE THAN: g ‘ SOPEK\DTEP\)‘ ACQ‘DEUTS\ IE / ' r / new / awaits? Po / / / / ~/ . D\$F\\$:>‘\K _ 4%..-.” $A¥2T4 AQC 'DE'QT' :DR\VEK b‘EECTO'R /‘ :E:\: O‘KT—good / / SUPERVISOK / \/ / / / / / / ,/ )K\\/I'\3C~., . ECE-‘Y’ 2». vcn \b TOCD V -..”.-.— IRQLFRAKG wflk‘r tSEiDECWD I N ‘/ M V MP’N 0333067»). ODERAT ION) / L__._,——J r—M / \/ 37%;: D (333$: oPEMTmIO ,u g FIR—0.65900” SALES DIKMACSIER / / / / L/I / \/ ‘F‘LEET I éfiL—Eé ...”...t D_ I __ . $U©$R\MT§>€,JT 4 L/ \/ SWER’UgtL-‘Lr ‘/ \/ L/ ”PE'Ksowsz. L .sm-tb L , MmeR / \/ swam J /I ‘/ l/ / ’ ../ -/I l ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROGRAM - PART III (Continued) .LbUR'S TREUFRETSHE'R pngDIAL WQULA QQDQST :DE—p 43‘ E \‘ 'Ts x $387!? TRAJMISGI WNUTKXn SCREWED? AD”, or THE: TO‘A’OKQ‘QG. USES)? ‘gmb W£;\::L£©¥ KYERSJ__R:\S::T :Qf‘gm AEAL?:::M $13923 VMTM/rfixi GIUEM ' GNEM? 5kg§74 r7~ 7 J 1 W 3W KEEP‘Dg‘ A MOTOR I FRE‘%P‘7‘T REC$$T€R AMRL‘FJS :0?“ Comp ’7 .. v MATERTNE _J J ‘0 f E I; ijglw 1 U15 STTTEM [U VEH\QL_EZ I‘LL KE’F‘YF 5H9?“ E U J ;[ U$€b i 2 i g 0 J 7‘ g ZIP—I}. 6 E; A 8- E5 N E --Q\Q_C_ \DEM‘V‘ ACQ\®;KS\§ KEFPT‘ > E; J g g T 9 0 - 1U ' ‘ a $5 V’Es DO ‘31 % VES TOO 5N %t . [MI 53’}: fill E15369 (lfi £19 {g 3?) Eur ‘ 4 9 I“ YESMoPg I” ‘6 *6 v: 03 ”’1” £500 V) 5m V55 00 VasmFg‘ "Z *‘ 3E5 M’ U W9 Lag,“ 5 E—’ 0 IR Tééuéfl I? f 1 IE PP P5 5% E ‘“ “T “w w w Jill]! .. 1;, ICC... ”..., ' I I 2 / 2/ '/ ' * ' / P12'R\C>F<‘._’6\L—L—4KQCADE'QWbCEDSTTE / v V HR. 3% / / / mom / /W / To $323323:ng 0‘1 / / / / ““755 LOUD mks +5? TFJKUKJT‘ O ; flog EACH $3) E'VERVw I" MW ’ ' E o \/ \/ / / / mow, / \/ mow. / I $1.: Emil-ER A :3: V / / \/ ‘/ m \UO‘R I C} AL—l— _kcc \ng‘T‘S, T ' ‘ EVEN) jDEkY—TE r V O I / / 1614) ka _DAMAG‘E To . - -- I“ “T _. . O VEHICLE OR M' / \/ / / MOM / - kQCADEM‘T UMT-H \/ "/ "/ V ch—T HER \)€\-\ \QLE' ' ’—1 I km. chmmao—Ts L ‘" +432. M46. ‘/ \/ \/ / ./ m0” / /Q”“W / W05 mfié’E—PEEESR ' \/ ./’ ‘/ \/ UDAosE‘ ”:FLIxULZT' , 4‘5 / L ’ few m) Wm: D‘LL Acc— Ibems O . 0'2»: OFFICE T “QEqRRDL‘Eb5 O1" 005‘ l/ \/ :Ws \/ \/ / Xv; A3,: ”:5 71cm macs: ) / ‘4 / v \/ TIT-Au LT As.) \I Q0 $1“ch LARK? f 0-K OBACQ'T‘. q I ~ Eur—£124 Y ' , / \3 L.- AQC ND§ «3‘s— , V 3‘. _ ALL. Accxbew'ré CST: / / / \/ / V/DEEKL‘I / \/ Wu . \/ \‘TSQ: EigfiiLsrégr 6R \/ \/ / \/ / \/ \NHO DRE *1- :FKULT_ 3‘4 , 5Em'u- ALL— ACC. \DEMT$ __ 0 Ms, L/ \/ \/ \/ mow. \/ x/ \/ n35 “233‘3‘ffi 330 \/ / V / / L/ [Do-k3 AT T‘FAULT ' ' \ . _ALL.‘ AQCFDErofi-S. ' “T O LOK / \/ \/ _ l/ — “Etc-QAVEKESS or \/ _ / \/ \/ / ERMAQE a} H pE-RML. IDQORV . S AchDENT PREVENTION PROGRAM _ PART III (Continued) +bm=§ “RE"??QESMER TR€MEDTAL \6 AM K5 AN AEE—R LQTDE'0T$ Jug: 13,310ch WN‘Q\\Q% flaming, A404 0-: THE‘ mmenos‘ USED? Afi'fiifi {if-3: Tux‘ruog or {IESNEE-s chfl‘m ACCIDEKS'T” Ammgxlza’b 1&6: Taft—L G ‘UE 9 2° GWEN)? II J 9 ’2 W KEEPNGT [q hf::::‘g U: ka‘r Egg EVE? AWLVSS Compare" m M . _ TR.) q q" >0 IW 3g 9 gégg >8-Ezvéflytfl\ W ‘ ‘“““QPE1 'Aifis *“fifl‘ SAEgr I? V é iwffi J Er! NIH” II W M PC-C‘DTW We Km 3, W ““3 ” .... , - ; LU 21;) V55 ; IIVES Mo SEEP? [p0 33(3) fin: 3gb] J‘r/ ~< Egg? £9 7’ Vasiwr 00 Q E 04owu 95130;? 420g1¥93w0w5 Vestvas VLwMO—Eaéfifl E " fl 4 0 E5 5 J o T d In W ti 7 - 5 ED. Off-W...”- EL'IZ: ...‘v I ' " ‘4 - (7 ‘ ALL. ACCT-DE POTS / - keg O W W V / \/ mow- \/ /ifm / P0P Rf Riggs V V / V 1 AT ‘F-kuu‘x‘ u ~~~~~ , L. Athbcu\—$ E¢> w/* v '“P , HRS ““133 \/ \/ MON' \/ \/RUKRTERLI \/ [757 3311?; {SI/SE 8: “T“ ‘/ \/ \/ l/ / / (é 0'0 “‘PEW NW5: Wm'qw CHECKEI L‘PRDE3TT‘0 MSW Tom , 5 J , \/ Au... AC: \bEKDT§, / / / too / \/ / \/ mow / ? mo“). \/ H53 EiqfiéixtiiiTSE‘f—J ‘/ W" ‘/ W5 O‘Q $21\QO\3€$T> . 8’ I» RLL. AQC. 006.wa V T ‘ 'REqu-KQLEB'D 01: L/ 004 ‘/ / moo. \/ I/QMRTERL‘I ‘/ H55 COST,ZDRW\AQ,‘= OR I/ / / 4:4\\)g"<‘ w"— 80 AMA; :bAMRCaE‘. , _ I TORI ALL.— RCQADEQT‘; -/ / / [-2 . , ' To [DQOLQIDQ ZDKMKCA / 0?: C03 \ -L w TL- H p 00 L... ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROGRAM — PART.III (Continued): t¢~. -. - ~ W _v .. , m mam-.6 m I LEAGfi-j‘.‘ \3. AQE 5E. Top I O 44 U3 ‘5 ‘r VDE OF— RECOCqun—IOM mew IS ONE BR55- COM‘PUT’E‘D ID'R\\/€T-'< AQCWX§YJ§ )1; DO’ ARE— K) \3 L ) U ) O ' ~ USED on) YEKK USED 1‘me QEQURD LPUT 0k.) ”Hm-H #105935 4" mm“ (0440 SERVEs OWE M ‘Sb‘FE Nb THE ; K .— AVE: 3,0ng33 Acmbekn— we 5 wamgcq w PzzeveumaLE T lm E Q Q” . Ep ‘ REQORJD _RELQR'DED ‘PEE _ _REY16LQ ED'Ru/ ekg O m '12ng g g Q I!) J) J Q (I Acqmzxn‘s pER \ OD Q I”) 9 f) {I \u 13 Hi? (I VENTO‘BLE Commune: OD COMMI T‘T‘EE‘ Qomm‘n‘EE‘ QEQDGHU'YED 5 F g) 9 62 g a i U U USED-f (am HO m 5 L114 ”39 h) Ownmas MEET. 9 A 2 P , ff P‘ U I: 1 4 ‘3 33 g 5 5&3 OAP :1 l”? i 3 E “J5 EL” 5 4 r ” J ‘ J ~ - o E P d . 3’ d E .. ...-I_ -..... E...” “‘4‘“ I/ / // / ‘I/ J To 'P / / J / w - w “A“?Em‘" MW / Owl.- \\ - \ K \ / / / { FAQ-H “ ..., , \/ / / ¢ / «mum - / 9.3 f 335:0 0 I" \C \/ L/ ‘/ \/ l/ M ACCINDUE ”\r/ )MSURAIQQE Co. WRESEMTATHIE‘ ? (/ 2,:(10. INSORNQQE . b \ v . ’EEDREsE M‘TA - TVIE' \ \_\ \ I z \ \ \\\\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \\\\ \\-\ \\\\\ "\ K R I E‘éEMREY \/ \/ \/ o/ ‘/ (/ ' 2:335 — -- .. - ' ._ L/ . P5 5:71:22 *- I / / / .25: 4/ 52.0” ‘/ AYES \/ . H RTE ‘/ \/ / g QW~ ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROGRAM - PART III (Continued) gigfif QIL-EAGC '5 ARE ALL )3: 00) ARE U$€ TOD I? no V Hob.) "5 TVPE OF mtcoqmflom BASIS—D lifiiue A: QnfiZDU‘F'E-j) :D'RwsR NACC‘DEmb 1 ’ sax-cg ”$513 - 06: 11> I‘Rom ”Rees—R1) PPUT 0M I’D—42ml“ RECIDEoTb A“ was“? mm 03 Ho $513ng 01:11; N Tbnwugq A 1.- W ”O THE. 1 . {f‘pj‘ RECORD 232‘? JUDGE b ACCIDENT” IDRWERS 00 boats \ECoRb ff ? .- 2 3 PREVEUTABLE T“ ME Q I LU . R ORDED “-qu— ”REV/Eu) on. C 3 , 2 .0 «I? Kongo“ memos. O J) 9 \p [1’ E LU g;— gQ {I VEIQTABLEI CQmmmEE COMmurrez COWm‘rT-Eg- ornnmrrEE RECOGQI‘IED 5 P 9 E g .4- A if»! 6 USE D N J u: LIJ ‘f 9 , MEET a , 3 p/ I 8i 32 :5 553 ME y w YES - M $9 3PM 3E iygsmygém 85 5E b OS '38 I. £5 Yes Do Vsswo yes mo ”550033 (A 4? 4 0% O _ I [4 rr 0 (f d > E ' w. --.- l i. j ! 3 i E o D 0 TOP mqkAcqemeN):—fi N ~~ \ ~ \ / J \/ \/‘ \/ SALES men: . ) TLEE‘T‘SU’PERIUENDEW fl’bro- \/ \ \ SobenvrsoRs — ~M~~ - Hf!‘ \/ EACH m4 / \/ \/ Ac: IDEM‘ / / \/ H—Hko ‘ THRU T013 MkaGIEMUQT‘ THRU ’ ‘9'.va mqk, “RAW 1959 \/ COMT’ROLk—TR. MOD ' ”59 \/ C R \C'F’ E. UC‘R .) / ETC . EVERY 1 \/ wczxs n: Accxbzm OQQQR \\\ SALEb 5 gas—\- \ II \x x x x \ Thrust; one L. \ \ \f \\\ $096k v IscR ' \/ bKLQS M 5‘ ND ? \CL \DGNT \/ mean . “$3“; 9. EA: H o I figssmu 9 ACCIDC—FJI \/ \/ l/ \/ (/ NEsoufi‘L‘ \/ mqg. OSI ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROGRAM - PART III (Continued) [F '90 ALL OK‘ILH/ ARE SPECIAL fish‘s IDESOQIBEL Mcummg'mvapmm: AWARDS Cmpwcaws’ w; 1333 I? vs; 7 - ‘ ‘ iBA§ED :FOR $755- ‘DEfiQ‘QPgE‘ SVSfE/‘q CHfihQ‘ED PCJQIDonb 0L.) MIC-1H 744%qu CHA’QCa—Efs USED 3>ng61<2§ ”RU LE5 :ngfiffli I964 -rVP§§ YES M) V55 be $425 loo ng loo V5.6 we. 1 _L.——EL)I_Y£$ ENS MOT Wan—V \/ L/ M l/ / / J J J k/ / (/ / [I I. / / l/ / §\ thong MEET—109$ On.) / ._/ SAY—‘21“)! - — — ZDRNER LEV—ER ”QT'RQBUQED choLL Ru.) Akbtp th‘Ro‘on Eb \/ k/ / \/ ”Q \beg \/ l/ (/ / / J I/ / / / «/ J / / / 4mm / / / / / A H u/ M/ :3 “PROGRAM INT—“R / / ”G \q (05‘ OZ) UCLED ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROGRAM _ PART III (Continued) IF wo‘ ALL_ ONJL»! APE swamp Has “925.01%; MC‘DEDE ‘PREVEMTABIEHAMARDB C—KWPAIQOOS chRAm IT ~ Vgsj L- FD HMO ED 5322:,“ CfirJ‘EKG'E: 13033606 3:50 432?: F lacs-:5 TDEéQ‘RIBE “WE? mugs Tics)??? WWW cMoqas TYPE—'5 ‘quI YES no yE’S 00 V55 00 ‘/E5 DO YES Do / l/ SEA ._ H‘T O'R ”\\$§ ‘/ J \/ / ”SC Ty”? AWA‘D ”U ~5q~ :POSTE ‘ R + BULLET/M5~~ ”957? ”759 SAFETY :DnegcmR snuuszn I957 A W‘CRDS ‘b-KQIP'DE) w uqsq — DRIVER 5261:0906 Apso- _‘DRoPpED #95? Pawn New Egan Man-27H F011 Ala ACCIDKUT BKu/Iu 6 MORE ATY‘EQVWQM To T‘HK‘O ”\X \qu" 9\ \\ ‘\ ‘\. ‘\ <\\ VEHICLE MAINTENANCE - PART IV ' D Q 117 V55 Hks @7qu 13?;pr bmm/ VEHICLE’JQ E “’w Eggséfi CD I}; . .Pm A ’RcDA-xxwep m D: 3‘5 - COD?- VEH‘CL‘E VEH‘QLE- Quin: ‘3 I: 2 ‘O’Q ‘Pm or: bzsc'ExBE )‘REVEYQ‘T‘IVE Warn IF NO, kDD MBER )MSPECT‘IOULPE‘RWKM’NCE or 5! E: UJ ‘D‘RO REMA\\3ED b-E’SCfR \ W‘RE'D SHEE ‘5 3312\VER 3 ($3131 I bch‘Vfi maxiMT—E-NAKBCE: Gk—QM THE 1 “:9? BE- “EE‘QOQNED > U Q—‘HA'QCR‘: 'EEPokrs ) E g 3 3 Lu 9553\‘364 J PU b 3 yg’smvesmygsmgt 5‘33 VESUO: E VESMO ‘ 8 <9, ooo - LUBE OIL. V/OLJAI— CHECK OF VEHICLE I E L / / I?) l/ we K 552 V / ./ \/ TUUE- Ups, BRAKE CHECK, ETC. OULV on 345/5 or )Ptvri? ‘BE‘Po'f-E'T' L A, I hoot) O‘R somvé— V/éUJLL WALK - 33:1: c330 A'koumb Q44 ECA< F )q / / ‘/ I/ \/ \/ lo,ooc>~—ruwe L)? ‘ ‘/ 30,000— BNKEE,'BEA?'MGIDL ETC. GREASE __ Np .SE'T' SCHEDug‘E ' MECHAUIQ 03A: FMRF‘D 4 t/ L/ l/ t/ L/ ./r 1/ ‘FOR 71,115 o-E b‘r‘t—O €12 MINH’EMAMCE' / 1932\0“ __ GAS éTA-rbg kabgcb MK‘MTE'Q‘K'QCE— * DEIEZT q wssxs - GEL-1:55? EO’Q UJED To JZARm wo‘RK OUT. , ngchT EACH (DEE-K — ODE' ‘J'RUCK )5 HILLE'Z) _ OuLy HDE‘FEC'TIVE' ITEM MS 3) I/ (7va x l/ l/ L/T / or}: Pours TOR TU;L’C”€ V’L / l/ l/ t/ [/7 L/ CT‘OM / /50“ l/ / ‘/r L/ \/ c/ 1/ 15M HQSDEQTIOM ' I/r/ / L 8 w€€<§ OR 2900 ’ L/ I/ F 0 ”5‘ '/ ‘/ ‘/ ‘/ “Pm, IMS‘PECTIOD Mr $52?“ 5,000 .. TOKDE? UP wHEEL BRAKE A ‘ . , , CHECK ,- IQ. \/ on L_‘/ ._/ ./ ./ BENRIMG, LIGHTé / - ./ / A 57“?qu - DEF SGT . OLJCE -/\‘ mom-r44 0'2 ~k§ ‘r/mE' ‘ FEE-FEET p ’7 / 00 L», M / / / 'PERM 1T3 _— OILJ GPEAbE, vowxg / . ...: \/ .. CHECK $ . I A _ 1 ...—... Izmir I Mow‘rH OR ’g,ooo _ _ /. a / OULK/Ju/ / ‘/ L/ ‘/L LUBRICA-r—IOM 40H.~—- STon/ V ’ MAIMTEHAIQCE‘ — Mo ‘EEAg “Prm. VEHICLE MAINTENANCE - PART IV'~ Q A y . kab 2 L, Lu PEERULAR ’7‘ (5, ' ‘Pm Cempmox/ PRC—T170?) DRILV ’YIEquLES q] 03 (1h) SCHEDULED 0,0 343,5 misc—RIBS 'PQEyg/urwg- 1?quka FF DC), CO-DE—I VEHICLE VEHICLE: b: NED t ‘ ”U Q 'Dm “ARMED ' . ‘ \ x Q;- MAlMTEUR‘QCE 7“?onka '1' 3mm: C ”0’“ng Hospgcwou 913:2?ng Q1: 3 g?) E1 LU “PMRAm . Hr: ‘DES "RVBEZ “QE’QUIRED S b DQ\\LER {3.x mY ‘0552 HbQ— CA—waCqE Necexmzcb (1)0 L) :5 “was > In 0' \U , Jg é :5 s #55 Ab yes 00 $195 mo 8’“ tgrd >45 w 5 ,1 \/E5 00 ~32: T 3 MONTHS OR 8.000 MILES E o'QT . , 7- 2> E‘ Compowgm EEEACKESISBEAR'MQ)5 "R Hue, E (o MOM-r445 OR 5,000 NHL-E3 /O L/ \/ ../ / V” L/ L/1 :P. m. lustQTIOM, /L‘ 1232B: EC? 0? MOAfl"+-IS o? 1,000—ou._, DoRT E’ TOME: (fps mm MERE]; é) \/ ()qu // L/ L/ l/ L/ GEE-A5 ’ ) ’ _ / t/ Gg€DERJ§L OVEPH‘N-UL- Wen “BEBE-.1) TDEF‘C‘I" IOQQ o (>be - 4, Easy HAD own "Pm CSHO'P up To "RE Mutzeb JISUALTNZDECTISM 0’ ’ 6 1 'qw , (Slugs: ‘T‘HEU,-Q€'NT'IMG, /4 L// OmLYM /‘ ;/ / /’ \/ )O,OC>Q_ ENGINE.” T'UILJS' U'P / TRUCKS $73”) It; ‘DULLED ~BY 30,000 - erIME-‘cOm7buanTofiqu‘stmn 5,5 1?? M‘T‘A L. Compnnyl CHAMQE’D 1M 'QCOS I, ‘/" \./ / / / - \./' l/ ‘2 2 DE—F EC?” a. EEPM 1:21) I. 500 LUBRICAT/OIU ‘j/ \/ DDU.‘/ ‘/U/ ., 145%“ OIL. \/J \/ / / L/[ 63000 d? ,5 L06- _TUI\)E UP)BRKKE$.GREA:C L LIC,HT6,QLuTc-#, ETC . +191 REPORTABLE ACCIDENTS COme/ CODE $355 1515b TC? '7 C1 MOWER o I 58 F359 1%0 19(01 “352‘ 1955 ”W4 :25 9 E5 EB 52 57 do 52 a: 35 e/ I no 4 (D 3 4 4 z 5 02 / 5 I? 52 .57 L% '7 ¢3 ES \‘ A} (a 7 3 5. 7 ESYWMTE—‘D 3T (101“?qu TH’EOOGTH flu): , 3 5 5° 5 5 5' 5' 5 5 7 5 may vafiAW BE Wm} M UK but m b bx Y) I7 5 é 5 4; 5 (o 5 e 5 <0 Qiufiifié ifig’mfi 15g 7 OK): QONWDN®} OJ\Tf‘L$ ”Q T‘ERN‘M'R /5.OL, fgfion' ~ - “\‘C-‘bE—YQT‘ :13ka NOT AVRIL—KELE /5 /Q. c$8 CQ7 /:i /:T /8> /7 I7 /8> // /7 "W" “:33: EQTAREBB: _ 1”,, 8 a> ;g 20 /5 J? 27 guz 52/ 46 57 REPORTABLE ACCIDENTS @omwfl)’ CDDE 1955 /95@ M57 /%33 xqsq xqas IQb/ /9é; 1955 /Géq[ womBER 9 £5“ 45 3e cfl% 57 £5 /8 gy> ga /5- m> C4 ’fl> 77 5m) ‘52, Q5” cm; 49 627 .z# (o /5‘ 5:77 3(0 007 20 .95 0’27 5/ 02-9 57 fl 7 . 772. no» 0.0L? 7%; MON:A%A:QQéD :01— - f ' expsmeuce A' \L I— 0R \chLl ‘ “75 20 997 :5/ 02? 33 :53 025 . I N // d535 ##51 J» 4; 37 35 5/ 951' MILES Comma}! CODE 19555 ' ‘- MUMBER 1615(0 )957 [(758 1959 IGNOO Iqbl IqbQ [QbE “364‘ '5 CID/0,1000 g) /o, boo 02 /o, 500 52 /o, boo I: I0, 600 g /o, 600 GM), goo 0’2 /C>, boo o’Z/O, boo 07 Kb, 600 No we, 000 x5e, coo lab 000 A56, 000 /5oo @1353 600 0.9353(000 0235, goo 0235, 660 235', 600 92337500 c155, goo g7,2,ooo 6% 7.2) 000 / 7 /87, 5’00 #557, 500 187/ 500 /32 500 /37, 500 /@7, 500 /57, 500 /52 5‘00 /57/ 500 /SZ 5'00 ' /5,@. 575: 000 525,000 /025; 000 has: 000 A525, 000 /5o,ooo L54, 0 GO 4591 000 /5é3) 500 / $10, Goo ' A5239 /5’ A; 7215" EZéO fi/QIZSZO 805; $150 797, $50 8/C7; 750 $97,570 C7027/917/0 9017) 550 785770 [)009é370 / . , _ _- . - - |'-’ 7 \n q 8 8’72 750 8/7; 750 8’7; 750 El? 750 ’ 63/7) 750 8/7, 750 8/7, 750 8/7) 750 Va, ’7) 750 8/7, 750 MILES COWVPN‘N 053:: ‘0‘55’ \qSLp Iqsv I953 @561 tqton Iqu [€251 Iqb5 ICHOHL q 1,0259, 000 1,;(067, Goo /, #9520 I 588,790 l, 774, low I, 90;,640 I, 65 4,6790 02 ,IQCIO, 200 I, 785 /50 1,807, 800 /O /,567440 1,567,440 /,5‘é7, 440 I, 5437:9140 L567, 440 5567, 440 [,562440 A567, 4,1410 /J5é7/ 17140 A557; 4.4/0 4) 800,190 %,Q90 8002 190 m) 2'90 Bm'gqo /, [001400 /, IOC>,4/OO /, /OO, “/00 /) /OO) SLOO // /OO/ $100 . W5 OF 1,154,970 “A I, l54fl7o I, 54,970 I, Isa-4, 6770 I, I54, 979 I, 54,970 /, 154.9 70 769 980 // a?)968)/5O ‘5)Q'L/4’ /0’20 5 9?,l’78,ooo 52,186,300 07,298,550 9:2,;57, Goo {I J i \N est ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATE Conmwy CODE: 1955 Iqm I957 I‘iSB [9557 F760 WW “7601 /%5 ”$4 UUMBczR ° I5 492.75! 3799 3799 9.5 35.025 538-49 £2.50 9.50 #71075 I699 Mp mad 38.6% ”-25 £5404 2544 qua 79-025 A261 590 #2025 /9 8.730 OZOJZD /é-Ob pZB-ll 90—00 //.90 )4. 5.2.1; 54>,é35 I554 Qé/l 395/ 3 61/. 01.2. :2/..2.2 01/29. oil-52; 52/32 0mg; Q/-;2;2 g/fla 257% //.05 /7 029.107 32.00 02667 307.00 0%67 32.00 gee-4:7 352.00 52¢.é7 3.3.230 /5A 7 l5 ,0, g 3335:? WCIT‘BTC’SVB/ bemocr them-4K wo-r «RWPuL-KBLE: /5 I2 35.20 55014— 8502 I55; 01/.% I894 20.519 Icyggfi //./8 8:26 Io 40-85 464(c)(5) A1911 3/30- 7.0-4.1 A545 7657 18.50 I115 /5‘.3/ é l8-7’75 53.79L 424.98 33.74 .2949? 020.90 924.53 c,7<9.I7 07635 3362 I4 ,7 3; 3.39 026.84 'ozsII £8.57 £28.57 529-87 // ' 42/425 1195‘ H.525 I7. 84 I4. 5(0 32% HICHIGRN STRTE UNIV. LIBRQRIES 31293010758344