Click for next page ( 49


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 48
48 CHAPTER FIVE CASE STUDIES The 10 carrier case studies in this chapter are based on phone For consistency, all interviewees are termed safety man- or face-to-face interviews with motor carrier safety manag- agers (SMs), regardless of their actual specific job titles. ers or other carrier officials with similar job titles and respon- Each case study includes a text box with five innovative sibilities. Most companies and interviewees were identified driver selection practices. Practices were chosen for the text through the project safety manager surveys, although some boxes based on the SMs' enthusiasm for them and to present were already known to the report authors. Interviewees were the widest possible range of worthwhile practices. Note also selected based on their carriers' extensive and innovative that, within each case study, qualitative statements made practices (e.g., as indicated on surveys) relating to driver (e.g., importance of certain driver traits, effectiveness of selection and hiring. specific selection methods) reflect the opinions of the inter- viewee, and not the necessarily the conclusions of this report. Interviewees were recruited from the survey question- naires; respondents were asked if they wished to also par- ticipate in a phone interview on innovative carrier practices. CASE STUDY A: LARGE TRUCKLOAD CARRIER Each interview followed the same general topic sequence, but specific questions varied in response to interviewee answers and carrier practices discussed. The sequence par- Five Carrier A alleled the survey questionnaire, but with emphasis on car- Innovative Hiring Practices rier practices. Usually this included practices or variations of practices not addressed in the questionnaire. The case More than 20 minimum driver requirements listed studies summarize interviewee answers and highlight inno- on website vative driver selection practices for each carrier. In many cases, interview data were supplemented by a review of the Three-stage approval process before full hire carriers' website content relating to driver qualifications and hiring. Companies are identified only as "Carrier A," "Car- Driving simulator used for road/range testing rier B," and so on, unless the company explicitly requested to be identified by name. Graduated progression to "A-Seat" driver status The 10 companies interviewed included large fleets In-house sleep lab for OSA testing (>1,000 vehicles), medium fleets (1001,000 vehicles), and small fleets (<100 vehicles). They are further classified as follows: Carrier A is an LTL carrier providing refrigerated, flatbed, and tanker service. It recruits both experienced and entry- Large for-hire TL carriers (AD) level drivers. For the latter, the company offers paid train- Medium for-hire TL carriers (EF) ing and a graduated transition to full-service driving. After Large private truck fleet (G) completing their training and obtaining a CDL, drivers are Medium private truck fleet (H) classified as "B Seat" for 60,000 miles of driving, and after Small bus fleets (IJ). satisfactory performance, are promoted to full "A Seat" sta- tus. The company's director of safety has decades of experi- The authors believe that all of the case study carriers ence in carrier safety and operations, and is active in several have excellent overall safety programs and employ valid and national truck safety-related organizations. effective hiring practices. Nevertheless, project resources did not permit formal evaluation of safety program effec- Carrier A's website lists more than 20 minimum driver tiveness or validation of any driver selection practice. Inter- qualifications. For current CDL holders, driving history viewees reported that the following highlighted practices requirements for the past 3 years include no failed alcohol were effective, but in only a few cases did they cite rigorous tests or alcohol-related driving charges, no reckless driving evaluations of the practices. convictions or license suspensions for points, and no more