Double driver awareness course

photome

Baldytyke88 said:

Goudy said:

It will be some sort of accredited driver skills and awareness course that you employer signs up to so they can reap certain benefits, like reduced insurance premiums. 
Speed will be one element, but it won't be the same thing.

That is possible, but I don't see how it can stop me from speeding.

Rather like passing your driving test at the beginning of the month and then needing to pass again at the end of the month.

I have been driving for 40+ years

What will stop you from speeding ? 

You can never have too much training 

Baldytyke88

photome said:

What will stop you from speeding ? 

You can never have too much training 

A £100 fine and 3 points should be enough to stop anyone speeding, the speed limit is now more in my mind.

cw8825

Baldytyke88 said:

photome said:

What will stop you from speeding ? 

You can never have too much training 

A £100 fine and 3 points should be enough to stop anyone speeding, the speed limit is now more in my mind.

I thought the whole basics of the post was that you had just done a course so didn’t need to redo the mandatory work one?

if you have recently took a course and been speeding again. Maybe the course is needed

Hoenir

Baldytyke88 said:

photome said:

What will stop you from speeding ? 

You can never have too much training 

A £100 fine and 3 points should be enough to stop anyone speeding, the speed limit is now more in my mind.

It doesn't though. Even when people are caught on subsequent occassions they'll argue their innocence to the cow's come home. Probably as their job / livilihood is at risk and/or their insurance premiums are going to rocket.  

Baldytyke88

Hoenir said:

It doesn't though. Even when people are caught on subsequent occassions they'll argue their innocence to the cow's come home. Probably as their job / livilihood is at risk and/or their insurance premiums are going to rocket.  

Maybe they should be fined 2 days wages or more instead, £100 is nothing to some people. I did think the driver awareness course could have been more extensive for some drivers.

One person on the course had an interpreter, so perhaps not very conversant with our rules. I knew the rules very well, but my 25 mph speed would have been classed as perfectly safe a year or two ago.

One of our drivers needed to go to court, or lose his license, so the penalties didn't work for him.

A few more years and AI will be able to stop us from speeding, but that will be the employer and not country wide. The Government wouldn't want to make everyone stop speeding, would they?

Kim_13

Baldytyke88 said:

photome said:

What will stop you from speeding ? 

You can never have too much training 

A £100 fine and 3 points should be enough to stop anyone speeding, the speed limit is now more in my mind.

You could opt for that rather than the police course if you think it more likely to prevent further offences.

Several possibilities here: 

- It’s just bad timing and everyone is having to do a course, whether they’ve recently done an official one or not. If those who have recently had NIPs were exempt, those who had clean records would complain and ask why they need a course if they haven’t done anything wrong, while those who’ve actually broken the speed limit are let off. They therefore get everyone to do it to avoid a headache. They’re not trying to make a profit so duplication is secondary; this is the easiest thing to do.

- They have only done it because of the number of their staff who have recently been speeding in their vehicles. Each of you is in this case is as responsible as each other for the fact you now have to do another course.

- A mobile camera being the source of the tickets makes them think they might be employing people who regularly speed when they think they can get away with it - so they want to lecture the staff about this themselves.

- Someone who was caught wasn’t eligible for a course and/or declined and took the points - and they want to make sure everyone’s done one without singling people out. At a minimum, that’ll be the guy who went to court - and as you’ve alluded to, your manager probably shouldn’t have told you that.

- The public have contacted the council asking/complaining/ranting about why they are paying their council tax to fund the salary of someone who is more likely to endanger the public than provide a service to them. Presumably this guy would have made a local paper, being in court for totting having been caught speeding in a council vehicle. By sending you all on a course, they can say they have taken action to prevent any further occurrence and do not condone speeding at all.

Do the course and if it is identical, then think about whether to suggest that duplication might not be the best use of funds in the current climate.

Okell

LightFlare said:

Maybe they want to focus more on the liabilities, responsibilities and possible consequences of carrying members of the public in a vehicle and abiding by the laws of the road as opposed to just reminding you of said laws

This ^

I don't understand why @Baldytyke88 assumes that the course his employer wants him to go on is the same as the police one he's just done.

I'd imagine they are completely different

Hoenir

Baldytyke88 said:

Hoenir said:

It doesn't though. Even when people are caught on subsequent occassions they'll argue their innocence to the cow's come home. Probably as their job / livilihood is at risk and/or their insurance premiums are going to rocket.  

Maybe they should be fined 2 days wages or more instead, £100 is nothing to some people. I did think the driver awareness course could have been more extensive for some drivers.

One person on the course had an interpreter, so perhaps not very conversant with our rules. I knew the rules very well, but my 25 mph speed would have been classed as perfectly safe a year or two ago.

One of our drivers needed to go to court, or lose his license, so the penalties didn't work for him.

A few more years and AI will be able to stop us from speeding, but that will be the employer and not country wide. The Government wouldn't want to make everyone stop speeding, would they?

Has been proven that a 20 mph limit reduces both serious injury and death to pedestrians. That's why it's increasingly being imposed. 
 

LightFlare

Hoenir said:

Baldytyke88 said:

Hoenir said:

It doesn't though. Even when people are caught on subsequent occassions they'll argue their innocence to the cow's come home. Probably as their job / livilihood is at risk and/or their insurance premiums are going to rocket.  

Maybe they should be fined 2 days wages or more instead, £100 is nothing to some people. I did think the driver awareness course could have been more extensive for some drivers.

One person on the course had an interpreter, so perhaps not very conversant with our rules. I knew the rules very well, but my 25 mph speed would have been classed as perfectly safe a year or two ago.

One of our drivers needed to go to court, or lose his license, so the penalties didn't work for him.

A few more years and AI will be able to stop us from speeding, but that will be the employer and not country wide. The Government wouldn't want to make everyone stop speeding, would they?

Has been proven that a 20 mph limit reduces both serious injury and death to pedestrians. That's why it's increasingly being imposed. 
 

True - I would also hazard a “guess” that pedestrians are nowhere near aware of their surroundings and vehicles than “we” were 20 or 30 years ago and the easy option is to inflict change on cars as opposed to pedestrians.

I sometimes think Darwin had a point - if pedestrians continue to walk aimlessly around with their face stuck to a screen, then why should the possible consequences be someone else’s problem

20 zones can be and are of use in some circumstances,but there seems to be a blanket implementation with sometimes no rhyme or reason to it.

Education and accountability for vulnerable road users also needs to be increased. If you walk out in front of a car and get hit - I guarantee who will come off worse, it’s just the scale. The injury can be prevented by teaching people to not walk out in front of cars

Baldytyke88

Hoenir said:

Has been proven that a 20 mph limit reduces both serious injury and death to pedestrians. That's why it's increasingly being imposed. 
 

Various things can reduce serious injury, such as metal barriers to make people cross in the correct place, limiting the speed of electric cycles and scooters, it would reduce serious injuries if motorways had a 20 mph speed limit, we need to set the correct speed limit for the road type and conditions.