To: Ben Atherly, Acting GLS GM February 17, 2006
From: Paul Schneider, UTU Chairman
Re: GLS Safety Dept.
Ben, I understand that the GLS Safety Dept. does not report
to the GLS management, but rather,
As you are well aware, Gray Line needs more drivers. This is the first winter that I can recall where we have farmed out work. Additionally, it concerns me that numerous other drivers are considering their resignations as more profitable job opportunities exist elsewhere. We need to do something to retain our valued employees.
Having assumed the position of UTU Chairman, I have noticed a steadily growing feeling of frustration from the drivers toward our Safety Department. Several issues, which I hope we can resolve, are contributing to this dilemma:
Inflated assessment
of points:
Dollar amounts in the Assessment Table need to be adjusted for inflation. They date from 1988. Based on the Puget Sound CPI, a $1,000 accident in 1988 equates to a $1,843 accident today. Knocking off a yellow step in 1990 was 3 points. Recently, a driver was assessed 6 points ($2,075.34) for the identical situation. This system needs to be changed.
Repair cost estimates
are inflated:
Many cost determinations from the shop are significantly higher than they should be. As a result, a larger number of points are assessed to the driver’s record.
Some repairs are
never made:
Drivers are assessed points based on costs that the company never incurred. One could argue that the damage would affect the valuation of the bus. On a 17 year old coach, would a buyer pay an additional $2,075.34 if it had a yellow step on it? I doubt it.
Unusually harsh
judgments in accident determinations:
One well-respected, senior part-time driver just resigned over an incorrect preventability determination from the Safety Department. A customer riding on his coach wrote to you stating, “This seems to me an unfair call reflecting poor judgment by the responsible manager… Making a decision that is clearly borderline (benefit of the doubt) should go in favor of the driver.” A lot of mitigating circumstances surrounded this event, and after the driver met with Safety, the determination was not altered at all. Completely frustrated by this decision, the driver opted to resign.
Length of time to make
determinations:
Just the other day, determinations were made on two accidents that a driver had in March and May of 2005. When put together, the resulting point total put the driver out-of-service pending a check ride or refresher course. The issue of time limits comes into play, because, if the first determination had been made in late March or April, the driver could have been re-trained and educated in any areas of need. Later accidents might not have occurred had the driver received this training. As a result, no suspension would have been necessary. The onus of responsibility rests with the Safety Dept. in making prompt determinations. It is understood that if injuries are involved, it might necessitate more time in assessing cost estimates.
Make the Safety Dept.
more educational, not punitive:
It seems the focus of the current Safety Dept. is one of “catching” drivers making mistakes and writing up infraction notices. Hiding in bus 303, monitoring the speed of buses entering the yard, or hiding in other vehicles spying on drivers doing pre-trip inspections seems to be a system set up for failure. It is punitive and counter-productive. A Safety Dept. that is there to help us improve is what we need. Rather than write someone up for not having a logbook, provide copies of the previous 6 days of log sheets, and the driver will be legal to do his or her charter. Post Safety Bulletins about dangerous locations where accidents have occurred.
Work with us, not against
us:
Everyone I talk to, whether it be labor or management, indicate that they want GLS to have a “Team Approach.” Yet, it seems we have more of a “League Approach” at Gray Line. There are several different teams that are constantly battling against one another. It seems we spend more time finding out who is at fault rather than simply correcting the problems and learning not to repeat them in the future.
As a first step, let us work together to make the accident assessment system less punitive and more educational. Dale Easley and Jim Colwell (HAL Safety Director) have already agreed to meet and discuss this opportunity. Norm Wherrett, Larry Gregg, Dustin Larsh and I have volunteered to represent the driver’s interests in this endeavor.
I am confident that things are going to change for the better around here. We will keep you posted regarding our progress.
Respectfully,