Getting street smart on worker transport safety

The following article was published in the Straits Times on 29 June 2010.

Getting street smart on worker transport safety
Enhance safety now, but stop ferrying workers in lorries in the long run
By Radha Basu, Senior Correspondent
Straits Times, Jun 30, 2010

Image credit: ST

LAST Tuesday, a Toyota Dyna lorry carrying Chinese construction workers skidded and overturned near the Thomson Road exit of the Pan-Island Expressway.

Some workers - perched on the vehicle's open deck - were flung out. Three died. Fourteen were injured.

Traffic accidents of this kind happen, but it is sad to see them recurring.

The lorry flouted safety regulations by carrying more people than is allowed by law. And though it had railings, these obviously did not help.

The incident led Members of Parliament and community workers to suggest that enhanced safety rules for lorries ferrying workers - announced last August - should kick in sooner than September 2012.

By then, all lorries carrying workers must have higher railings and canopies. There are guidelines too, on the number of workers each lorry can carry, depending on its size.

Barely 24 hours after the Thomson Road accident, a lorry packed with workers rammed into a tree in Jurong. Six were injured. This vehicle had some of the required safety features, such as a canopy and higher railings. But the workers were injured anyway.

It is true that no amount of rules and penalties can prevent traffic accidents. Lorry drivers themselves must also be careful and avoid speeding, for example.

But many are also asking why workers - foreign or local - should continue to be ferried on the back of lorries and not in safer 'enclosed' vehicles like buses. They have a point.

Lorries are goods vehicles, designed to carry cargo. Humans are not cargo. Most developed nations and some Gulf countries have banned the risky practice of ferrying workers on the back of lorries.

In Singapore, traffic safety is usually of paramount importance. For instance, people who do not belt up in cars face a $120 fine.

Two years ago, when eight-year-old Russell Koh was killed after being flung out of his school van during a collision, the Government announced that it would spend $35 million over five years to help bus companies retrofit 6,400 small buses with seat belts and front-facing seats.

Last year, 166 people were killed or injured in accidents involving victims sitting on the cargo decks of lorries and pick-up trucks. In some cases in recent years, the casualty numbers have hovered around the 200 mark. Despite this, why do we continue to accept the practice of transporting humans like cargo?

To be fair, the Government has made efforts to improve workers' safety on the roads. After a review last year, a government-appointed workgroup recommended stiffer penalties for errant lorry owners and drivers who flout safety regulations, tighter rules for carrying workers on the back of lorries and more frequent checks.

The workgroup was co-chaired by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) and the Ministry of Manpower. But as the second accident last week showed, even the enhanced rules may not be enough.

The workgroup did consider whether buses could be used to transport workers. But having consulted a 'wide range of businesses in different industries', it felt that the 'impact on industries and businesses will be significant, should the transport of workers on the back of lorries be disallowed'. Around 200,000 workers are ferried in lorries here daily. So the status quo remained - but with lorries being required to add safety features.

Businesses that save money by transporting workers on lorries would naturally be averse to spending more to transport them in buses. But should they be allowed to continue with this low-cost method at the expense of worker safety?

In an ideal world, ferrying workers on lorries would be outlawed immediately and employers would deploy buses to move them around, mindful that workers' safety is worth the extra cost. This would be the long-term solution to the problem.

Meanwhile, if employers insist on using lorries to transport workers, the least they can do is retrofit the lorries for safety. Putting up high railings and canopies can cost as little as $1,500 per lorry.

More can also be done to create incentives for employers to do more, not less, for worker safety on the roads. The LTA is considering bringing forward the 2012 deadline for fitting all lorries with stricter safety features. This is a good step.

It might also introduce stricter rules to ensure that foreign workers are qualified to drive on Singapore's roads. The driver in last week's fatal accident - and another in an accident last May which resulted in four deaths - were foreign workers. They were allowed to drive here without practical tests.

There should also be stiffer penalties for infringing existing rules. Even after a revision last year, fines for lorries carrying extra workers - not exceeding a quarter of the permissible limit - are only $500 for first-time offenders.

The fine for not displaying the 'maximum passenger capacity' label, as mandated by law, is a paltry $100 - the same as for displaying a false sign. Increasing such fines substantially could prove a deterrent.

In the long run, the Government should consider setting a timeframe for companies to phase out the use of open deck lorries to transport workers.

Companies that transport large numbers of foreign or local workers may protest loudly about the high costs of such a move. This is their prerogative.

But the state has to balance their interests against those of workers and make a judicious decision. Besides, an accident could prove more expensive to companies involved. In a settlement last year, a Bangladeshi worker who fell off the back of a lorry was offered $50,000 in compensation.

The safety culture being assiduously promoted in our shipyards and construction sites should extend to our roads as well.