First impressions can determine the course of a roadside inspection, and enforcement officers say professionalism, preparedness, proper recordkeeping, and training are key factors in staying out of trouble. Meanwhile, they identify a lack of documentation as a key issue at facility inspections.
This is according to Bud Kneller and Alf Brown, former enforcement officers with decades of experience, who spoke at a CarriersEdge webinar on Feb. 11. Kneller, a former MTO enforcement officer, provincial trainer, and CBSA instructor, specialized in roadside enforcement and officer training before co-founding Frontline Commercial Vehicle Solutions. Brown, who oversaw audits and safety programs at both provincial and federal levels, held roles as a district enforcement coordinator in Ontario and later served as Alberta’s director of vehicle safety before retiring and joining Frontline.
Both experts agreed that first impressions can go a long way toward ensuring a smooth interaction with enforcement officers.
Kneller said that a driver’s behavior, the vehicle’s condition, and the condition of a cab can all play a crucial role in determining the depth of an inspection.
“I usually like to try to get the door open,” he said. “It was as much for me to take a look inside and get a general overview of what was there like. Was there something there that he could hurt me with and also what did it look like? If it looked like a dog’s breakfast, generally speaking, those are indicators that there may not be a high level of concern with maintenance and following the law.”
At the scales
Kneller referred to the weigh station as an additional example, explaining that at most Ontario scales, vehicles exiting the highway pass over weigh-in-motion sensors that measure axle spreads, axle weights, and, in some cases, assess additional factors such as wheel-end heat levels. These sensors provide key data before a truck even reaches an inspection area. Speeding through this section might tip off the inspectors, he said.
“At least in Putnam, Ont., it’s a posted 40 km/h zone. So if you’re one of the first trucks coming off the highway, don’t go over it at 80 km/h, because you’re going to tick off everybody at the scale — because those things are very sensitive — you’re going to make our screen a blur, which is now going to mean I definitely have to stop you and talk to you. And maybe take you over to the other scale, where I weigh you per plate, as opposed to over the weigh-in-motion.”
Kneller noted that sensors also capture licence plates, linking the truck to its Commercial Vehicle Operator’s Registration (CVOR) profile. Officers are more likely to conduct a closer inspection if a truck has a high violation rate, even if no immediate defects are visible.
Brown added that, in earlier years, officers often based inspections on the exterior condition of a truck and a driver’s attitude.
“We would look at the condition of the truck from an exterior. First impressions go a long way. So if the truck looked well-maintained, if the driver looked like he was alert, paying attention, then in all likelihood we may just give them the green light…[otherwise], we’re going to probably bring it around to have a closer look.”
Brown says an officer can understand a lot from the beginning of an interaction with a driver, adding that preparedness — including relevant paperwork in decent condition and order ready — and understanding what is required during an inspection are key. He shared an example of a driver misunderstanding a basic requirement: “I asked a driver for his Schedule 1, and he said, ‘Well, I work Monday to Friday,’…that’s my first indicator that maybe this driver hasn’t been trained by the carrier on how to do proper inspections and what criteria to look for.”
Rewarding ‘good’ carriers
Enforcement officers focus on identifying trucks that pose safety risks rather than conducting unnecessary inspections on well-maintained vehicles, Brown explained. “[Our] job is to get bad trucks off the road, make the road safer…while they’re taking an hour to inspect a truck [that has nothing wrong with it], 10 bad trucks are going to go by,” he said.
Kneller echoed this sentiment, saying that enforcement is looking to reward those carriers who invest in safety and proper training – all the things that affect driver behavior, maintenance, and hours-of-service compliance.
Officers perform a triage process before deciding whether a truck should undergo a full inspection, he explained, saying that for every truck that came through the scale, he would have a conversation with the driver and do a quick walkaround. If lights, tires, wheels, trailer brakes, and yearly inspection stickers were OK and no air leaks were detected, the drivers were free to go.
“We felt like our job was to be trying to take the poor (or poorly maintained) vehicles or fatigued drivers off the road, which, in turn, rewarded the companies who were doing good maintenance, who were spending the money, who were making sure that their drivers were planning their trip so they didn’t have to run over hours,” Kneller said.
Facility audits
While roadside enforcement targets immediate safety risks, facility audits often reveal deeper compliance issues — especially when it comes to documentation.
“The lack of documentation is the number one [problem],” said Brown, emphasizing that many carriers fail to keep proper records of driver training. Even when training is provided, it often goes undocumented, making it difficult to prove compliance. “We look at it [in a way] that if it’s not written down, it didn’t happen.”
He also added that carriers frequently fail to document regular maintenance properly, even if they are performing the work. “The law is very clear. You have to have the date, the odometer reading, and the nature of the repair, inspection, or service — just three things. It’s relatively easy, but they’re just not doing it.”
Even when reviewing driver abstracts, some fleets fail to review them, which is legally required of them. Brown shared an example of a fleet that provided him with a driver’s abstract during an audit, unaware that it revealed a license suspension.
Defect reporting
A lack of defect reporting is another common issue uncovered during facility audits.
“I’ve had drivers in training say, ‘If I write the defect down, I’m throwing my owner under the bus,’” Kneller recalled.
However, he explained that the law protects drivers who record minor defects — something that wasn’t always the case. In the past, officers could ticket a driver for listing a defect, which discouraged honest reporting. “When they rewrote the law, they made it so that if it’s not a serious defect — something that puts road safety at risk — and the driver records it, enforcement says, ‘Great, you did your job.’ Now it’s up to the company to fix it when you get back.”
Despite this, some drivers still hesitate. To them, Kneller says, “Let the company worry about that. You do your job and leave their job up to them.…if you don’t have something in writing, then you have nothing to go to court with. You have nothing to show the MTO. You have nothing to show your insurance company.”
Credit: Source link
