Prosecution Details

Charges 1-4 Being a responsible person at a workplace failed to ensure that a commercial vehicle driver who was required to drive a vehicle that formed the whole or part of the workplace, drove in accordance with regulation 3.132(2)(a) of the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations 1996 made under the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984; namely by failing to ensure that the commercial vehicle driver had each period of 7 consecutive hours of non-work time separated from the next by not more than 17 hours, contrary to regulations 3.131(1)(a) and 1.16 of the Regulations.

Charge 5. Being a responsible person at a workplace, failed to ensure that a driver fatigue management plan was developed and kept current by a competent person for every commercial vehicle driver required to drive a commercial vehicle that formed the whole or part of the workplace, contrary to regulations 3.133 and 1.16 of the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations 1996 made under the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984.

The accused operates a bakery located in an industrial area of Geraldton. The bakery supplies bread to local shops for retail and also transports bread to Karratha six days per week.

On each of those 6 days, Sunday to Friday, at approximately 11 am, bread is loaded into one of two trucks operated by the accused in preparation for transport to Karratha. Each truck has a gross vehicle mass in excess of 4.5 tonnes. Three different drivers undertake the journey on two occasions each week, departing at approximately 12pm. Karratha is some 1140km or so from Geraldton and driving time for a one way journey is in the region of 11-14 hours, allowing for short breaks.

In July 2006 a WorkSafe Inspector visited the accused's premises in Geraldton and spoke with the manager who, together with his sister, have responsibility for the day to day running of the bakery on behalf of their parents, who are the directors of the accused. When the Inspector examined trip records relating to a number of commercial drivers during July and June 2006 it was found that hours being worked by the commercial vehicle drivers exceeded the maximum work times specified in the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations and insufficient breaks were being taken by drivers. The Inspector issued six notices to the accused in connection with fatigue management issues at that time.

Later, in August 2006, the Inspector again visited the accused's premises in Geraldton. The Inspector spoke with the manager again as well as several of the accused's commercial vehicle drivers. The Inspector's enquiries revealed that notwithstanding the previous issue of notices connected with fatigue management, nothing had changed and the accused's commercial vehicle drivers were still exceeding maximum work times and having insufficient breaks. The charges preferred are a representative selection of the breaches identified (which were in the region of 18 or more instances of commercial vehicle drivers failing to drive in accordance with regulation 3.132(2)(a) of the Regulations). The trip records accurately reflect the times worked and nonwork times of the drivers involved.

The accused controlled trip schedules and the allocation of work to drivers. The accused collected daily trip sheets from drivers and at all relevant times had knowledge of the work times of the drivers. None of the drivers drove with a "two-up" (relief) driver.

Charge 1

On 2 August 2006 a commercial vehicle driver employed by the accused, commenced work in Karratha at 0505 (having driven there the previous evening) and worked until 1538, the time he arrived in Geraldton. The driver then had a rest day on 3 August before commencing work on 4 August at 1250. The driver then worked until 2400, arriving in Karratha at that time. The driver then had only a short break before commencing work again at 0140 on 5 August and working until 1343, his arrival time in Geraldton. The driver did not work on 6 August.

On each occasion that the driver made the trip between Geraldton and Karratha, he stopped only for short periods of time, being less than 2 hours. Thus, during the period of 72 hours commencing at 1343 on 2 August, the driver did not have seven consecutive hours of nonwork time separated from the next by no more than 17 hours as required by regulations 3.132(2)(a) of the occupational safety and health regulations. Rather, a period of nearly 25 hours elapsed between 1250 on 4 August and 1343 on 5 August before the driver had 7 consecutive hours of nonwork time. It was practicable for the driver to have had 7 consecutive hours of nonwork time.

Charge 2

On 9 August 2006, a commercial vehicle driver employed by the accused, commenced work in Geraldton at 1200 and worked until 2400, arriving in Karratha at that time. The driver then had a break of 6 hours before commencing work at 0600 on 10 August and working until 1800 later that day, his arrival time in Geraldton. The driver then had a break overnight before commencing work in Geraldton on 11 August at 1200. He then worked through until 2400, his arrival time in Karratha. He then had a break of 6 hours before commencing work at 0600 on 12 August. He worked through until 1800, his arrival time in Geraldton.

On each occasion that the driver made the trip between Geraldton and Karratha, he stopped only for short periods of time, being less than 2 hours. Thus, during the period of 72 hours commencing at 1800 on 9 August, the driver did not have seven consecutive hours of nonwork time separated from the next by no more than 17 hours as required by regulation 3.132(2)(a). It was practicable for the driver to have had 7 consecutive hours of nonwork time.

It was practicable for the accused to have ensured, through proper trips scheduling, time allowed the trips, instruction and/or training of drivers and procedures in place with appropriate internal enforcement of those procedures, that the commercial vehicle drivers working for the accused drove in accordance with the operational standards contained in the Operational Safety and Health Regulations.

Charge 3

The Inspector interviewed an employee on 22 August 2006. This employee had been employed by the accused for approximately 7 weeks at that time. The employee's medical fitness to drive a commercial vehicle had not been certified by a medical practitioner during that time. He was examined by a medical practitioner on 21 August 2006, however, a certificate had not been provided at the time of the interview.

Charge 4

The Inspector interviewed a commercial vehicle driver employed by the accused on 21 August 2006. At that time, the driver's medical fitness to drive a commercial vehicle had not been certified by a medical practitioner. He had been working for the accused for approximately 3 months at that time.

Charge 5

The Inspector interviewed the accused on 22 August 2006. During the course of the interview, the accused admitted that no fatigue management plan had been developed and kept current by the accused in respect of the commercial vehicle drivers employed by the accused.

The accused Pleaded Guilty.

Pleaded Guilty