NIOSH national survey of long-haul truck drivers: Injury and safety

Abstract

Approximately 1,701,500 people were employed as heavy and tractor-trailer truck drivers in the United States in 2012. The majority of them were long-haul truck drivers (LHTDs). There are limited data on occupational injury and safety in LHTDs, which prompted a targeted national survey. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health conducted a nationally representative survey of 1265 LHTDs at 32 truck stops across the contiguous United States in 2010. Data were collected on truck crashes, near misses, moving violations, work-related injuries, work environment, safety climate, driver training, job satisfaction, and driving behaviors. Results suggested that an estimated 2.6% of LHTDs reported a truck crash in 2010, 35% reported at least one crash while working as an LHTD, 24% reported at least one near miss in the previous 7 days, 17% reported at least one moving violation ticket and 4.7% reported a non-crash injury involving days away from work in the previous 12 months. The majority (68%) of non-crash injuries among company drivers were not reported to employers. An estimate of 73% of LHTDs (16% often and 58% sometimes) perceived their delivery schedules unrealistically tight; 24% often continued driving despite fatigue, bad weather, or heavy traffic because they needed to deliver or pick up a load at a given time; 4.5% often drove 10 miles per hours or more over the speed limit; 6.0% never wore a seatbelt; 36% were often frustrated by other drivers on the road; 35% often had to wait for access to a loading dock; 37% reported being noncompliant with hours-of-service rules (10% often and 27% sometimes); 38% of LHTDs perceived their entry-level training inadequate; and 15% did not feel that safety of workers was a high priority with their management. This survey brings to light a number of important safety issues for further research and interventions, e.g., high prevalence of truck crashes, injury underreporting, unrealistically tight delivery schedules, noncompliance with hours-of-service rules, and inadequate entry-level training.

A Multivariate Time‐Series Examination of Motor Carrier Safety Behaviors

“…To date, extant research has not focused on how carriers prioritize classes of safety behaviors, but rather has sought to understand the prevalence of unsafe behaviors (Chen et al. ) and factors that predict unsafe behaviors (Cantor et al. ).…”

“…While a few studies have predominantly focused on identifying the prevalence of unsafe behaviors (e.g., speeding, violating HOS rules) (Hertz ; Chen et al. ), most studies have sought to identify driver‐, haul‐, and carrier‐level factors that predict such behaviors. At the driver level, factors found to affect safety behaviors include owner‐operator status (Mayhew and Quinlan ; Williamson et al.…”

“…Many studies have investigated motor carrier safety behaviors. 1 While a few studies have predominantly focused on identifying the prevalence of unsafe behaviors (e.g., speeding, violating HOS rules) (Hertz 1991;Chen et al 2015), most studies have sought to identify driver-, haul-, and carrier-level factors that predict such behaviors. At the driver level, factors found to affect safety behaviors include owner-operator status (Mayhew and Quinlan 2006;Williamson et al 2009;Cantor et al 2013), driver age/experience (Braver et al 1992;Sullman et al 2002), lack of sleep (McCartt et al 2000), drivers' attitudes toward safety (Swartz and Douglas 2009), and pay structure (Monaco and Williams 2000;Shaw et al 2002).…”

“…It is difficult to understate how motor carrier safety affects truck drivers, motor carriers, shippers, consignees, other supply chain members, and the general public. Chen et al (2015), citing statistics from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), note that in 2012 there were 3,464 fatal, 73,000 injury-causing, and 241,000 property-damaging crashes involving commercial trucks that caused an estimated $99 billion in damages. Given firms across all tiers of the supply chain use motor carrier transportation (Wilson 2015), motor carrier safety is an important concern for all supply chain members, not just carriers (Cantor 2008).…”

Logistics Innovation and Social Sustainability: How to Prevent an Artificial Divide in Human–Computer Interaction

“…Logistics companies take various measures to mitigate these aging effects through, for example, smart route planning and optimization (Verma and Verter 2010;Dondo and Cerd a 2015;Phan and Kim 2015;Gingerich et al 2016) and automation, but also by offering incentives to existing and new, young truck driver personnel. Another motivation to introduce AI applications is safety: not only the safety of other road users, but also working conditions of drivers themselves (Khorashadi et al 2005;Pattinson and Thompson 2014;Chen et al 2015aChen et al , 2015bPahukula et al 2015;Bedinger et al 2016). The potential of support by AI applications in road transport is huge, with distance control and warning systems as obvious examples.…”