I passed my HGV1 (as it then was) in 1990, and drove artics for 15 years. After a number of disagreements with my transport manager, I left and went into warehousing for a big “logistics” company which eventually got itself into difficulties by growing too big too fast, and disappeared up its own exhaust pipe. Finding myself redundant, I presented myself at the Jobcentre asking what courses I could go on, specifically the DCPC. Within days, I was starting a week-long session at the taxpayer’s expense. Drivers hours, First Aid (park safely, administer CPR, phone an ambulance), Digital Tacho, Health and Safety (put your hi-vis on before you go to the bog) and two days playing with a brick grab. No revision, no exams, nothing, just turn up. One guy spent most of the course asleep. Did I learn anything? NO! I’m glad I wasn’t having to pay for it myself. At least I’ve now got a pile of certificates and a nice card with my photo on it. I think that in time DCPC will become much more involved, and have a test element. Look at how much more complex and multi-stage driving tests have become in recent years. I want to keep my licence just in case, but the amount of new legislation has taken too much of the pleasure out of the job, and I’m almost glad to say that I probably won’t be returning to the industry any time soon.
Harry Monk:
So what will Mrs Bell do if everybody refuses to take the DCPC and opts to retire instead?Drive one herself? I doubt she could tell the front end of a truck from the back. Mrs Bell has a reputation for ignoring any information that does not fit in with her mindset and it looks like she is not about to change that.
The best thing that could happen would be if Traffic Commissioners were people promoted from within, people who actually understood the industry, ex-drivers and the like. But of course, that would never happen because of this peculiarly British idea of the “class structure”.
It did happen Harry, maybe you missed this post.
Older drivers may remember the man for the Eastern Region TC Geoffrey Simms. He was an out and out haulage man, understood the job, ran his own lorries and probably shut down more companies in that region than any other. He was famous for closing down Martin Graves, Mathew Cornish, Romantiek & closing Stobart down for having a lack of finances, which happened when WA brought in William and Andrew to replace Edward.
Geoffrey Simms, formerly an experienced transport
operator who was fiercely proud of his own track record of never having
experienced a vehicle roadworthiness prohibition in the whole of his
career as an operator ran the Eastern region with a firm hand
Geoffrey Simms made Mrs Bell seem like your favourite Nanny 
tachograph:
Wheel Nut:
tachograph:
Even when a bloke from a training who would be in a position to make money from the DCPC criticises it he’s told he’s just being negative and should get out of the industry.How exactly does that bode well for training standards in the road transport industry or individual drivers?
I think it is much more possible that Ms Bell does read Trucknet and she was probably engrossed in the long thread about OCRS and Blazing Saddles. Surely you remember ALERT and the agency, and the trainers and the rest.
For once I do agree with BB, and would have applauded her myself
I remember a thread about the OCRS but have no idea what it has to do with this thread, but maybe I’m thinking of the wrong thread.
Regardless of OCRS, Blazing Saddles (whatever that is) or ALERT the simple fact is that Beverley Bell apparently made it clear that she’s only interested in views that do not conflict with her views.
Why would you or anyone else want to applaud such a dogmatic attitude towards the DCPC?
Because from Day One of joining this site in 2004 there are many posts between Mal (Sudden Accident 
) and myself, with me advocating some on the job training. I would prefer the old method of spending time in a transport yard, learning the ropes, going off with other drivers and all mucking in on a Saturday morning to load and maintain the vehicles. This is never going to happen as there is not enough small hauliers from which to learn our trade, there are too many accountants, corporations and shareholders. Plus we have Health and Safety zealots who prevent a driver doing the simplest maintenance.
Mal had the opposite view and often said the HGV1 was the only training he needed and he should not be forced to do any more except for ADR or job related qualifications like Quarry cards. He left this site and started his own truckers message board.
To answer your original question as to why I applaud Beverley Bells speech, it is because that at last someone is putting the ball back into the court of the employers, and hopefully force them into providing or funding accredited training for their staff as many other member states have done in the past and will continue to do so with this dumbed down training. Think Holland (Diploma), France (FIMO), Hungary, (Workshop) and Luxembourg, (Fully Funded) for starters.
I also hope that JAUPT in its present form is abolished and the DCPC passed to a body like OCR or SQA, who can issue a “Qualification”
Wheel Nut:
‘…I … hope that JAUPT in its present form is abolished and the DCPC passed to a body like OCR or SQA, who can issue a “Qualification”…’
Sounds reasonable to me: Shouldn’t such a credible ‘afterthought’ solution - ie, it will better involve agencies’ more connected to our reality, next deserve to be put to our political masters 
Harry Monk:
So what will Mrs Bell do if everybody refuses to take the DCPC and opts to retire instead?
as I’ve said before Harry! JUST say no! I answered no to 1&2 
I completed mine to day .the trainer said that you cannot drive a unit with a C licence unless the fifth wheel has been removed.Oh well HO-HUM.He was not as boring as some though.
So what makes SQA any ‘better’ than JAUPT?
I happened to be in an ADR session when both SQA and JAUPT turned up. Both sat at the back whispering to each other. Both had a brew at brew time and both filled in some kind of report and seemed to do the same job.
I have heard more stories of cheating in ADR exams than I have heard cheating the DCPC. Most drivers I have spoken to with an ADR qualification were helped with the exams by the trainer via a nod and wink or similar … so SQA’s standards are no better than JAUPT. Having said that the ADR exams I did were under strict exam conditions - our very own Diesel Dave made sure of that.
Are people more supportive of SQA just because they have been around longer?
I have just been audited by JAUPT. Almost 4 hours checking policies, procedures, paperwork etc and the guy did a very thorough job. Standards are being pushed upwards. I was invited to raise any points or concerns I have and will receive a written reply to them.
My suggestions were
- Set some kind of minimum qualification trainers must have for both training and the subject to be delivered
- Stop allowing courses to be repeated - or some kind of restriction on time scales
- Bring in a pass or fail exam
- Rate/grade approved centres and make the rating available online so drivers/companies can check out the standards
- 7 hours is too long. I suggested 3.5 hour sessions so 10 of them is 35 hours
- I also suggested making 1 course a year compulsory rather than allowing 5 years to pass without any … if you see what I mean.
shep532:
I have heard more stories of cheating in ADR exams than I have heard cheating the DCPC.
I didn’t think you could cheat in the DCPC, i thought you for example do a classroom on maybe drivers hours (for example) and that was it, no test. Its down to the individual if you take any notice of it or participate in any questions etc…but you’ve had the instruction. Thats how it work is it?
shep532:
My suggestions were
- Set some kind of minimum qualification trainers must have for both training and the subject to be delivered
- Stop allowing courses to be repeated - or some kind of restriction on time scales
- Bring in a pass or fail exam
- Rate/grade approved centres and make the rating available online so drivers/companies can check out the standards
- 7 hours is too long. I suggested 3.5 hour sessions so 10 of them is 35 hours
- I also suggested making 1 course a year compulsory rather than allowing 5 years to pass without any … if you see what I mean.
I’m not surprised that you as a trainer would suggest those things.
The one I agree with is the one I’ve marked red, a test is good but what does compulsory training attendance achieve?
I would suggest that most of the subjects people have DCPC training on would be better with just a short multiple-choice test, this would show that the driver had the required knowledge, compulsory training attendance proves and in many cases achieves nothing, it just costs drivers and the road transport industry as a whole a lot of unnecessary expense.
shep532:
So what makes SQA any ‘better’ than JAUPT?
SQA check that not only are the courses following a strict timetable but also that the instructor is providing the CORRECT INFORMATION in the correct way
JAUPT remit is not to check the actual info being given but that the timetable is being followed and that the general course content follows what was submitted for approval
I am not sure if they have any teeth to remove a trainer who presents in a way which is ‘not nice’
This is why JAUPT are allowing trainers to carry on when blatently giving out false info
ROG:
shep532:
So what makes SQA any ‘better’ than JAUPT?SQA check that not only are the courses following a strict timetable but also that the instructor is providing the CORRECT INFORMATION in the correct way
JAUPT remit is not to check the actual info being given but that the timetable is being followed and that the general course content follows what was submitted for approval
I am not sure if they have any teeth to remove a trainer who presents in a way which is ‘not nice’This is why JAUPT are allowing trainers to carry on when blatently giving out false info
I can see what you are saying but don’t particularly agree.
With SQA and ADR there is one single subject. With DCPC there could be hundreds of different subjects. To have an auditor that is well versed in all areas would be difficult
The last time I was audited the guy did know what he was on about and according to him had been selected to audit that particular course because it was his area of expertese. there are only something like 18 auditors in total - how could they know all the potential subjects?
JAUPT have no teeth at all - that bit is down to the DSA
tachograph:
shep532:
My suggestions were
- Set some kind of minimum qualification trainers must have for both training and the subject to be delivered
- Stop allowing courses to be repeated - or some kind of restriction on time scales
- Bring in a pass or fail exam
- Rate/grade approved centres and make the rating available online so drivers/companies can check out the standards
- 7 hours is too long. I suggested 3.5 hour sessions so 10 of them is 35 hours
- I also suggested making 1 course a year compulsory rather than allowing 5 years to pass without any … if you see what I mean.
I’m not surprised that you as a trainer would suggest those things.
The one I agree with is the one I’ve marked red, a test is good but what does compulsory training attendance achieve?
I would suggest that most of the subjects people have DCPC training on would be better with just a short multiple-choice test, this would show that the driver had the required knowledge, compulsory training attendance proves and in many cases achieves nothing, it just costs drivers and the road transport industry as a whole a lot of unnecessary expense.
I knew that no matter what I put it’d come down to “Oh well you would because you’re a trainer” Most of what I put would actually make my life harder - but get rid of the idiots.
I had twelve lads in a course on Saturday. i gave them a very simple 15 question multi-choice test on drivers hours before we started. Top score was … 6. That’d be 12 drivers not showing up for work Monday 
Some of that was down to just not knowing how to ‘work’ a multi-choice test. They knew the answer but just ticked the first one they saw that looked right - there is a technique to multi-choice.
I’ll agree with you on the short multi-choice test … but my experience having met a lot of drivers is that they wouldn’t pass without some training/study. And - when your job is on the line you get panick and all sorts. Then there’s those with learning issues etc there again a lot would have no trouble with a little test. The 12 lads on Saturday all got over 75% after the course - and I would hope so to! So if the ‘test’ was a keep or lose your job an awful lot would be better having some training/instruction/refresher just before it.
I aint gonna win whatever I say … if you don’t want to do the DCPC - don’t do it
Ms Bell may well read this forum as suggested and judging by the language she uses in her arguments IMO she is applying the attitude of some drivers on here namely:
“If you don’t complete the DCPC on time…no more job…as there are plenty of out of work drivers out there waiting to take it from you”.
As I said previously the DCPC is not going to go away and there is only one way you have any chance that it may, and you should all know the manner of how to make it happen…but you won’t.
Insurers could decide the success or failure of DCPC.
Who would they rather be extending cover to experienced drivers or novices with DCPC.
Employers will still want 2 years experience. The more draconian the language from authorities the more likely they’re panicking take-up is too low. U turns is what this government likes anyway.
If there is a U turn and the travesty is scrapped then will people like my good self be reimbursed .
From what i can remember of Mrs bell’s words on the last 2 occasions I heard her talk about DCPC she was basically saying that OPERATORS need to get on with it and that she would be targeting the operators.
I already know of two operators that have been forced to put drivers on DCPC courses by Mrs Bell and I am sure there will be many more.
Some of these drivers may not WANT to do the course but at least it will be paid for etc
alamcculloch:
If there is a U turn and the travesty is scrapped then will people like my good self be reimbursed .
Remember it’s an EU thing so whilst we are still members (which we will be until at least 2014) then it isn’t going away. Even then, the larger players in the industry and the Government like it so even outside the EU we would still keep it.
tallyman:
alamcculloch:
If there is a U turn and the travesty is scrapped then will people like my good self be reimbursed .Remember it’s an EU thing so whilst we are still members (which we will be until at least 2014) then it isn’t going away. Even then, the larger players in the industry and the Government like it so even outside the EU we would still keep it.
Do you have any evidence of this?
The reason I ask is because the only reason I can think of why large companies would like the DCPC is if they were getting grants for putting drivers through it 
I’m sorry lads I am having difficulty following some of the arguments here.
Ms Bell has an impossible task in enforcing the DCPC regulations as she cannot possibly do it alone… and anyway what lawful authority does she hold to instruct Operators that it is their responsibility to enforce it? As far as I can see she is attempting to employ the same tactics as were used by government to collect taxes from employees/workers all those decades ago…and more recently the enforcement of the “Smoking Ban”.
She may well come unstuck on the DCPC if Operators object…and they should. It is not their remit to enforce the will of governments. Anyway why should operators act as Policy-men? They are not Policy enforcers.
One of the examples I saw was pretty straight forward. An operator was found to have a poor maintenance regime and various tachograph issues and was subject to a PI.
One of the results was the curtailment of their Ops licence for a number of days. The licence would only be reinstated once ALL drivers had attended an approved DCPC course that covered daily checks as well as drivers hours. I saw the letter from Mrs Bell. The operators licence was suspended from a Friday night to a Monday morning to allow the training to take place. No training and the licence remained suspended. As long as the training took place the Operator didn’t suffer too badly.
I don’t know the full powers of the TCs but believe them to be quite high. I see no harm if the DCs lean on Operators to push the DCPC along. Isn’t this a positive result? The scheme isn’t going to get scrapped or go away so people may as well stop waiting for that … isn’t it better that it is pushed onto operators rather than individual drivers?