How to respectfully dispute information on a safety profile
Dave Elniski, Industry Advisor, Safety & Compliance
I want to discuss a topic that is important to me and, for some, somewhat controversial: disputing safety violations. This article is intended to be general in subject and tone, so first I will define how I will be using the following three terms in this article:
-Dispute: When I use the term “dispute” in this article, I mean any way in which a carrier or individual can request a review of a violation whether through an online system, formal court proceedings, private discussions with a prosecutor/attorney, the use of a third-party service, or a direct conversation with an enforcement officer.
-Safety profile: When I use the term “safety profile”, I am referring to any document or record which displays information related to the on-road safety-related performance of a driver and/or motor carrier in Canada or the USA. Some examples of these types of documents are a commercial drivers abstract, an Alberta Carrier Profile, a Central Analysis Bureau (CAB) report, or information from a Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) Portal account.
-Violation: When I use the term “violation”, I am referring to any record of an incident where a commercial driver and/or motor carrier were found to be noncompliant with a safety rule, law, or policy and is also recorded on a safety profile. Some examples include an Alberta Violation Ticket, a defect on a Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) inspection report, a Notice and Order, or reportable collision recorded on a Carrier Profile.
As a safety professional, I have reviewed violations for motor carriers where I have not agreed with the enforcement officer’s assessment of the incident. During such incidents, I follow three general steps:
1.I decide if I have a reasonable argument as to why I believe I should start disputing and only dispute if the dispute is fair.
2.I then make sure I am using the proper channel for the dispute.
3.Finally, I make sure that I am always taking the approach of collaboration over confrontation.
It is my goal here to show drivers and safety professionals that violations can be disputed respectfully and in such a way that positive professional connections are built.
1 – Be Honest: Is it a fair dispute?
I don’t think it is a good idea to dispute every violation just to see what will get removed or withdrawn. If a driver or carrier has received a violation, there is probably a good reason why. Fighting for the sake of fighting will not build bridges between industry and enforcement.
However, neither law enforcement officers nor drivers are infallible. When a commercial vehicle is pulled over for an inspection or because of questionable driving behaviour, the condition of the vehicle and behaviour of the driver are being compared against rules which are written to protect society (laws, CVSA’s out-of-service criteria, etc.). Drivers and carriers should be operating within the constraints of the rules; law enforcement officers are tasked with ensuring the rules are followed. Both sides make mistakes and there is no shame in that.
Officers use the rules to decide if a violation will be issued, and a driver and/or carrier can use the same rules to decide if the officer was correct and fair. These individuals do not need to agree with each other, and a dispute can be initiated by a carrier professionally and respectfully if the carrier believes that they have a good argument as to why the violation should be reduced or removed.
I recommend attempting to get in contact with the officer that issued the violation to get their side of the story. This is a good idea before deciding what, if any, remedial action will be taken against the driver who was operating the vehicle. A calm approach that tries to capture both sides of the story will help reveal more details about the offence.
If a carrier knows deep down that they are guilty and the violation was fairly recorded, I suggest still reaching out to the officer politely for more details but not initiating a dispute. The carrier is unlikely to have the violation overturned and it may just harm the reputation of the carrier. For large fines, there may be financial reasons to ask for a fine reduction; still understand what role the carrier played in the incident and be respectful and courteous in all dealings with enforcement and government representatives.
2 – Identify the Proper Channel
Violations and other incorrect information on a safety profile can typically only be disputed through the appropriate channel. Different types of violations have different ways of being disputed.
A violation ticket issued by a peace officer in Alberta under the Traffic Safety Act, for example, must be disputed through the Court system1. Depending on the charge, this can require a mandatory court appearance. In other situations, the charge may be negotiated with the Crown Prosecutor outside of court instead of waiting for the actual trial date.
Another type of violation a carrier might see is something recorded on a CVSA inspection report from a US inspection. In this case, the FMCSA has an online system for motor carriers and drivers to challenge what they believe to be incorrect information: the DataQs system. The DataQs system allows all FMCSA-generated data to be challenged and tracked online2.
In Alberta, violations on a CVSA inspection report that a carrier wishes to challenge can be disputed in one of two ways:
1.If the carrier and/or driver believes a violation is incorrect, they can get in contact with the officer directly and discuss the situation. As of this article’s writing, the process must be started by the carrier within 28 days of the inspection; the commercial vehicle inspection station or office listed on the report can provide specific information3.
2. If the carrier and/or driver believes an entire inspection has been incorrectly assigned to them (such as an inspection on a vehicle that is not actually registered to the company), they can contact Carrier and Vehicle Safety to report the error4.
The above information does not cover every type of violation dispute, and that is not my goal. What I want to make clear is that there are specific proper channels depending on the type of violation and jurisdiction in which it was received.
If a violation is being disputed, identifying the proper channel is important so that the time of the people involved is not wasted. It also demonstrates knowledge and professionalism on the part of the person starting the dispute.
3 – Collaboration Over Confrontation
Disputing violations should never be about pride and confrontation, and the proceedings should never resemble an us-versus-them situation. I do not believe in fighting for the sake of fighting, and at no point in the process is there a time where it is appropriate to be disrespectful or unprofessional.
I believe that highway safety and compliance is about protecting the health and safety of road users and the public, protecting and preserving public infrastructure and the environment, and facilitating a healthy economy. In order to do these three things, the trucking industry, the public, and law enforcement and government need to collaborate effectively.
I don’t think anybody wants to be issued or to issue a violation. However, the government needs to be able to monitor the trucking industry so that those organisations that are not operating safely can be identified and corrected. Our current system of violation recording is the best system that has so far been devised.
Summary
Incorrect information on safety profiles and violations can be disputed. I have described how I believe these interactions with government and law enforcement should be approached by a driver and/or carrier. These types of interactions are a good way to learn more about safety and compliance. They are also opportunities to practice interpersonal skills that can help build collaborative relationships between industry and government.
References
1 – “Traffic Court”, Alberta Courts, accessed May 14, 2021, https://albertacourts.ca/pc/areas-of-law/traffic
2 – “DataQs”, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, accessed May 14, 2021, https://dataqs.fmcsa.dot.gov/Default.aspx?enc=k/9fWbdKdAx/S1LNnQI/DvftqdGcGyzGMO+FClbjYQdVlFW3w4xXN/CdL+VL0QOPiE7JhUDZxZdTBhX5RL8wujRIgBP3ESyjsBY131Dm5A4Z4CY370qbEw14k2twkI5gP7rQWvJEe/BdwwNhOvvZpyd89B/dp6P81+oi1mCajsU=
3 – “Commercial vehicle inspection stations and branch offices”, Government of Alberta, accessed May 14, 2021, https://www.alberta.ca/commercial-vehicle-inspection-stations-offices.aspx#jumplinks-1
4 – “Carrier profiles and monitoring”, Government of Alberta, accessed May 14, 2021, https://www.alberta.ca/carrier-profiles-and-monitoring.aspx#jumplinks-4