56 Fitzroy Street, Marrickville NSW, 2204

The 2019 Road Freight NSW Conference

The premier trucking industry event in New South Wales

Thursday 19th September 2019
Waterview, Bicentennial Park, Homebush

This year’s RFNSW conference is being held in the trucking industry’s heartland of Western Sydney. The conference theme is “Trucking’s future in NSW” and we’ll be discussing what’s on the horizon in terms of safety, telematics, driver shortage, port issues, Industrial relations, policy and regulation.

The conference content is being developed to provide delegates with key takeaways and strategies that can be implemented immediately to improve operations and provide significant cost savings.

We are also launching the inaugural RFNSW 2019 Awards Lunch at the conference to recognise excellence in the trucking industry across a number of categories.

Partnership opportunities are now open for the conference. Partnering with us aligns your brand with the leading association for the trucking industry in NSW and facilitates engagement with key decision-makers including operators, industry leaders and policy makers.

Please click here for more information on partnership packages or connect with Simon O’Hara, CEO, Road Freight NSW on Mob: 0400 188 815 or E: simon.ohara@rfnsw.com.au . We are happy to work with you to design a partnership package that suits your requirements and opportunities will be allocated on a first-in first-served basis. Please ask for a prospectus click here.

CEO Report

Save the date for our conference on September 19 for a conference that goes for 1 day in Western Sydney that you will not want to miss. We believe your time is valuable that is why we have made this conference as accessible as possible. You don’t have to pack, book flights or do anything else than come along. We will save your business money and ensure that you are in the room with the NSW trucking community where you can have a chat with regulator, policy maker and supplier alike.

DPW

We have had some good conversations with DPW around the financial guarantee and the carrier access agreement and can report that carriers who have paid bonds can keep them in place rather than signing up to new directors guarantees.

We are also talking to DPW about those who have signed a directors guarantee reverting to a bond. We will keep you posted on those discussions.

Class 3 Port Botany Container Transportation Mass Exemption Notice

On Friday you should have received notice about the above. This is something we have been working with RMS on for the last 12 months and marks a reasonable start to further discussions on this front of overweight containers. It is a shame that the respective councils did not come onboard at this instance – but we have faith in RMS/TfNSW to continue to engage with those councils in a constructive manner to keep freight moving at the Port.

Best regards
Simon O’Hara

Gateway Project

Roads and Maritime Services are planning for the Sydney Gateway – a new toll-free connection from the Sydney motorway network at St Peters Interchange to Sydney Airport’s International and Domestic terminals. It will make freight journeys from the west and south-west to the airport and Port Botany.

Consultation will be open from Monday 27 May until Friday 21 June 2019.  We encourage you to provide your feedback and all comments will be considered as part of the planning process. 

There are a number of ways you can make a submission, by:

Road Freight NSW will be providing feedback to RMS and seeking a more operator friendly design

Review of Heavy Vehicle National Law

Release of the easy access to suitable routes issues paper

Today we released an issues paper seeking feedback on easy access to suitable routes under the Heavy Vehicle National Law (HVNL).

The purpose of the paper is to:

  • summarise the current access arrangements under the HVNL, and in Western Australia and the Northern Territory
  • analyse issues with the current access arrangements under the HVNL and outside the law
  • seek preliminary views on the way we can improve heavy vehicle access.

This is the third of eight issues papers in a rolling consultation to mid-2019. We invite written submissions and online feedback by Friday, 16 August 2019. You can upload a written submission via the NTC website or submit your ideas through our dedicated HVNL Review site

Reminder: Effective fatigue management issues paper open for comment

We are seeking feedback on the ways we can improve fatigue management in a future HVNL, and want to give everyone affected by the HVNL an opportunity to have a say.

You can upload a written submission or provide online feedback by Friday, 16 August 2019.

Feedback on the risk-based regulation paper

Thank you to those who provided feedback on our foundation paper about risk-based regulation. To view the submissions we received, visit the NTC website.

Project updates

The next two issues papers due for release in late June will explore safe vehicles, and safe people and safe practices.

For more information on the review timeline, upcoming key dates and further project updates, see the HVNL microsite. 

Safe Work

Safework has sent us a report on a recent fatal tipper incident. Please see the attached here

Clarity on contractor management under the Chain of Responsibility

Published by Nathan Cecil

The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) has released an article “Extra CoR pressure not required under law”.

The crux of the Chain of Responsibility (CoR) article is that many heavy vehicle operators are facing pressure from larger customers to disclose a wide range of operational and compliance documentation (e.g. details of drivers, safety systems and work diaries).

“This level of information is not required by a customer or primary contractor under the CoR laws,” explains NHVR.

“It’s the transport operator’s responsibility to manage their own operations.”

“Customers are entitled to rely upon the fact that their transport operators have systems and procedures in place to manage their own safety responsibilities.”

To say that the article has generated debate and consternation is an understatement!

The reaction highlights that there is ongoing uncertainty over precisely what is required under the new primary safety duty in any particular circumstance. It also highlights the risks involved in making high-level and all-encompassing statements about what is required.

It is important to understand the article in context.

First, in our view, the article is aimed at supply chain businesses which fulfil the role of consignee or consignor only – so pure ‘customers’ of transport services. The comments do not necessarily extend to customers who also fulfil one or more of the other CoR roles.

Second, the article teases out the underlying test for the primary safety duty is that a person is only responsible to the extent that they can influence or control a relevant transport activity. Many businesses in the supply chain are requiring the provision of information and records in relation to matters over which they don’t have any real influence or control.

Third, the article seeks to refocus the compliance eye primarily on a party’s own conduct of its own transport activities. This is because the laws impose a primary safety duty on persons in respect of their transport activities, not all transport activities of all parties within their supply chain.

So far, so good. However, before you consign all this CoR stuff to the bin and say “I am never required to make any enquiries of anyone in my supply chain in relation to their CoR compliance practices or performance”, you should consider the following points.

First, the take-away from the article will not necessarily be true if you conduct additional transport activities. If you also pack, load, schedule or unload goods or operate premises at which loading/unloading occurs, you will likely have influence or control over a larger range of activities and a broader and deeper primary safety duty than outlined in the article.

Second, as a matter of risk management or corporate governance, you may have a lower risk appetite than ‘base level compliance’ with the CoR laws and may desire a greater level of assurance of compliance by those within your supply chain.

Third, you may be motivated by matters beyond legal compliance. For example, industry studies have concluded that transport operators who are part of robust industry accreditation schemes (e.g. Trucksafe, NHVAS, WAHVAS) are safer and subject to fewer incidents, delays and fleet down-time. That is, those operators may offer a greater level of operational/commercial dependability than others. As a customer of transport services, you may only want to engage with transport operators that can offer you such assurance and outcomes and so you may be minded to undertake detailed pre-engagement operational due diligence.

Finally, general guidance is well and good, but a final determination in Court often turns on very focused consideration of very particular circumstances. If you would prefer to avoid such an invasive judicial inquiry on ‘line ball’ calls, it may be better to go just that little bit further and ensure that you are indeed on the right side of the line.

So, at the risk of suffering from exactly the same difficulties involved in making high-level and all-encompassing statements about what is required… our advice (in a nutshell) for transport customers is:

  • satisfy yourself that your transport providers are aware of their CoR safety obligations and have in place systems to manage those risks – one way to do this is get them to tick a ‘yes, we have compliance systems’ box or put a clause in your contract that says that they must do so. However, this is rather passive and can’t blindly be relied on in isolation. A more assured approach is to ask for some evidence of those systems, e.g. the underlying CoR compliance policy or accreditation scheme enrolment – but not every compliance record
  • periodically observe during the conduct of your transport activities that those systems are being used and are effective, e.g. make checks to ensure that loads aren’t arriving obviously poorly restrained or with evidence of load shift
  • keep a watching brief for those ‘flashing red light’ warning signs, e.g. a truck that arrives on a severe list due to overloading or poor load restraint or that is very obviously damaged and unroadworthy – the kind of things that cause you to go “whoa, that isn’t right”, even if you aren’t a trucking expert.
  • This article originally appeared in Australasian Transport News magazine www.fullyloaded.com

Road Reports

RFNSW News

6 June 2019

Fair Work Commission awards 3% increase to minimum rates of pay.