1. 1 Pillar 1 Enforcement and implementation Issues For Drivers Brussells, April 3. & 4. 2012 AFT-IFTIM

2. Objectives of the Directive

3. Implementation: a shared responsability The professional driver is at the heart of a set of systems implying a multiplicity of stakeholders: the company (at a larger scale the economy), the social partners, the training providers, …the Member States, the EU. It is in the interest of all stakeholders that the objectives of the Directive are met: improvement of road safety, skilled drivers, fuel savings, … 3

4. A transposition that generates particularisms The Directive gives space to Member States in transposing that gives rise to a broad interpretation and a variety of situations: –Profiles of trainers (“instructors qualifications”) –Periodic training programmes: Modular system ADR courses certified for periodic training Practical courses and driving not widespread examination at the end of periodic training 4

5. Initial qualification - Examination and tests In option 1 (course attendance and test), the directive gives the Member States the freedom to choose a written or oral test. Most have chosen multiple choice questions with an average duration of 45 mn, except in Spain where the duration is 100 mn. Pass marks for the theory tests, examples: Conditions of retest: retest must be carried out within 6 months to one year: in the Czech Republic, the trainee can retest 3 times but from the second, he must retrain the subject he/she failed;, 5 Number of questions Pass marks Bulgaria6083% Espagne10050% Lithuania3080% France6060% Sweden6080%

6. Initial qualification - Examination and tests In option 2 (test only), tests are divided in 2 parts: –Theoretical test consisting of questions (multiple-choice questions, questions, …) AND case studies (minimum duration of 4 hours). –A practical test consisting of a driving test (minimum duration of 90 minutes) and a practical test (minimum duration of 30 minutes). But practices varies from one State to another: –candidates in Slovenia and UK have only 30 mn of practical test. –pass marks are different among Member States: Belgium: (100 MCQ +…): 80% for the theory test UK (100 MCQ +…): 80% for the theory test Ireland (100 MCQ +…): 61% for the theory test Slovenia (30 MCQ): 60% for the theory test, –conditions of retest are also different: the candidate can retest within 6 months to three years (Belgium: validity of the theoritical test is 3 years) 6

7. Examination pass rates Too few answers collected on this issue to determine if average pass rates for drivers taking the exams only option are lower or higher than those taking the compulsory training plus test option However, candidates to initial qualification in option 2 have to train before passing the test. As this training is not compulsory, the cost is unknown, even if it is not supposed to reach the level of compulsory training in option 1 Member States.

8. Periodic training - Examination and tests The paragraph 13 of the introductory preamble states that Member States or their designated entities “should be responsible for organizing the tests provided for in connection with the initial qualification AND the periodic training”. In a few Member States (Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary), periodic training is validated under the conditions that trainees successfully pass the tests. Failure to the tests implies that the driver is (legally) unable to perform the job and might loose his/her job. 8

9. Periodic training deadlines (1/2) Criteria adopted by Member States to make sure drivers undergo periodic training in due time and to avoid bottlenecks: –Date of birth : in Denmark, authorities have set the birthday as point of reference to organise periodic training. – Age : in Portugal, the age of drivers is the chosen criteria for planning periodic training  Until 10 Sept. 2011 : drivers under 30 years old;  Until 10 Sept. 2012 : drivers ranging between 31 and 40 years old;  Until 10 Sept. 2013 : drivers ranging between 41 and 50 years old;  Until 10 Sept. 2015 : drivers over 50 years old. –Date of issuance of the driving licence (e.g. Bulgaria) –Last digit of the identity card (Spain)

10. Periodic training deadlines (2/2) Difficulty in recognition of national timetables (periodic training deadlines): case of austrian hauliers that have complained about drivers that have been fined in Slovenia. Impact of delayed periodic training starting date: higher risk of bottlenecks when approaching deadlines; risk that all drivers will not complete in a good time their periodic training; high risk that drivers who have not undergone periodic training might be sanctioned in case of control. But what about the situation of drivers that have not been able to achieve the Periodic Training due to lack of training capacities in the Member State in which they have their normal residence? How will be distributed the responsability?

11. Mutual recognition of qualification Article 10 of Directive 2003/59/EC provides that proof of CPC (initial qualification or completed periodic training) is the Code 95 on driving licence or the Driver qualification card (DQC). Survey indicates widespread mutual recognition of initial qualification, even if a few Member States indicated not to consider valid a CPC obtained in another Member State. The main difficulty is related to the periodic training, when not undergone and completed in one single member State: the host Member State has to check the information in the Member State of origin; the process of checking is long and implies time and a certain financial burden. Necessity to tend to a homogenous certificate for all training providers and to set up a centralized information mechanism managed by the Authorities in charge of issuing the CPC in each Member State.

12. Exchange of informations Usefulness of creating an IT tool enabling the exchange of information. Such a tool would greatly facilitate mutual recognition because it would: –Guarantee secure access to Code 95 related information to competent authorities/bodies; –Enable Trans-European swift control over drivers’ conforming to Directive provisions; –Allow for quick notice of member States particularities, e.g. different deadlines set for periodic training set by Member States. According to Dutch respondents, the Commission’s view on this matter is that the initiative for an information exchange solution should come from member States and should be negotiated bilaterally 12

13. 13 Training programme Respect of the training programmes by keeping in mind the objectives of the Directive 2003/59: –Road safety; –Sustainable mobility with fuel consumption savings; –Professionalisation of drivers; –Image of the profession; … Trainees rights to inform authorities in case of dysfunction during the training Control of the training activities for better quality: –Availability of equiment and training materials; –Respect of the required driving hours ; ….

14. Training of trainers The trainers are one of the key-elements of the success of implementation of the compulsory training not only in terms of quantity but also in terms of quality. The profiles of trainers must meet the needs and respect the requirements defined by law or regulation. In Austria, the profile has been defined but, according to a respondent, the actual situation seems to be far from theory. Trainers are estimated to be unskilled and unexperienced. In some Member States, the trainer must undergo periodic training. According to repondents, it is the case for France, Belgium, Denmark and Hungary. The implementation of periodic training for trainers seems to be a necessity to maintain quality, and improve quality, where needed.

15. The funding of the training is a major issue 15 Access to the profession depends on acquiring the initial qualification: compulsory training that is expensive and not really accessible without subsidies or rough tests that actually require training. The transport industry has experienced shortages of drivers. The training cost, if only bore by the driver, is an obstacle to the access to the profession. As benefits from training are shared by all stakeholders, funding mechanisms implying all beneficiaries should be set up.

16. 16 Training hours: working hours? The question of training hours considered or not as working hours has received few responses: - in Belgium, Finland, France, Lithuania, Sweden and UK, they are working hours; - in Austria, Hungary and Slovenia, they are not considered as working hours - in Bulgaria, it depends mainly on each company rules; This issue is important because it has an impact on working conditions, and specially on working and rest times regulations and the possibility (or not) for the driver to undergo training without breaking social regulations (when taking a training on Saturday) after having driven the days before.

17. Impact of the directive Most respondents do not express their opinion (any answer or « don’t know ») for these issues. Almost half of respondents said that it has contributed to improve qualification levels. 30% of respondents said that it has contributed to improve the image of the profession (33% said that it did not). Half of respondents said that it has not contributed to facilitate recruitments. The issue of road safety has not been addressed (too early to get measures), This argues for the implementation of qualitative or quantitative measuring tools of the impact of the Directive 2003/59.

18. Labour market information Importance to access to information about drivers for implementation and development of training but also to avoid huge fluctuations on labour market. Questions that have collected no or rare answers and which are essential for the labour market knowledge and employment and training policies: -Number of drivers that have achieved their periodic training -Number of drivers that have undergone « bridging » training courses -Number of approved training centres -Number of drivers (and their characteristics: age, years of experience, ….)