Copyright © 2001 FleetWatch magazine and FleetWatch On-Line.

No part of this publication may be reproduced without the prior written permission from the publishers. Views published are not necessarily those of the publishers.

More operators need to publicly air their views instead of having one-on-one conversations... then we can get issues on the debating tables and press for improvements

It has been some time since the Professional Driving Permit (PrDP) was introduced to replace the previous Public Driving Permit (PDP). How's it going with the new system? Good and bad from what FleetWatch managing editor, Patrick O'Leary, hears. Read this article and we'd like to hear your experiences and views on the PrDP system.

A letter received from Nick McConnell of The Kendal Group in Howick outlines in clear, step-by-step detail, the cumbersome and time-consuming process of renewing a PrDP. Here's his experience - in his own words:

I refer to the comment in the Legislation Watch article by Max Braun in your June 2006 edition that there were about 327 000 expired PrDP's and wish to comment as follows.

On Friday July 21st, I attempted to finalise the renewal of my expired PrDP. This was my third visit to the Mkondeni Test Centre in Pietermaritzburg but luck was not to be on my side. My medical examination forms had expired by one week! However, this is not my main reason for writing.

In order to renew a PrDP, one must stand in the queue at the above centre for anything up to one hour (sometimes more) to hand in one's application forms, pay an application fee and collect medical examination forms to take to one's doctor.

Once the medical examination form has been completed by a doctor, one has to return to the Testing Centre and stand in the queue yet again for an hour or more to hand in this medical form and obtain Police clearance forms to be taken to the SAPS.

One must then proceed to a Police Station near your place of residence, have fingerprints taken, pay a further fee and then wait around six weeks for the clearance forms to be returned to you from the SAPS.

These Police clearance forms must now be taken back to the Testing Centre, where one stands yet again in a queue to have one's eyes tested (even though the doctor has already done this), have more fingerprints taken (even though the Police have already done this too) and to hand in these forms together with all of one's other completed documents. 

One must then wait another suitable period of time before returning to the Testing Centre yet again, stand in another long queue and hopefully obtain one's duly renewed card. All told, one has to make a total of four trips to your local testing centre, just to renew one little ol' PrDP. 

In my case, I live in Howick and run my own business. On each occasion, I have had to take more-or-less a full morning out of the office to go to the testing centre in PMB. This does not include time spent at the Doctor completing the medical examination, time at the Police Station having fingerprints taken, etc. Is it any wonder then that many don't bother to renew their PrDP's?

While I fully understand that a medical examination and Police clearance are essential, why can't one make a single trip to one's local testing centre to collect all the necessary forms, pay the necessary fees and return once ALL the forms are completed instead of having to go back and forth umpteen times like a yo-yo?

When I questioned the supervisor why I couldn't collect all of the forms at once as I did not live in the immediate area, she said that this was the law and she could not change it for me! Well, what about all of the other poor sods who have to take time off work or place their businesses on hold while they make FOUR separate trips to renew a simple PrDP? And it's not only time that is wasted here. Petrol/diesel used for each trip, additional traffic commuting back and forth, wear and tear on vehicles, down-time on vehicles while drivers stand in lengthy queues, etc.

If these procedures were to be simplified, or some additional staff placed on the counters to assist and speed up the process, then I'm sure that many drivers will find that they can now afford the time to renew their PrDP's? If the Traffic Departments want the driver-public to co-operate, then they must become more user friendly to all."
 

Money-making racket!
While not totally decrying the idea of a PrDP, McConnell's letter clearly shows that there are major flaws in the process that can be improved on. Here's another view - this one from Ivor Keppler, MD of Time Freight.

"Don't you find it amazing that the drivers of the vehicles involved in so many "accidents?" hold "Professional Driving Permits"? For years I have argued about the implementation of PrDP's and that it is a money-making, time-consuming racket. Our Forklift drivers have to be licenced to drive (code B) because they drive in a public place and they also have to be licenced under Regulation 18 of the OHSA and have to be re-trained and re-tested - in theory and in practice - every two years under OHSA!!! But to drive a 50 000 kg missile (getting an EC licence is a joke) all I need is proof that I don't have a criminal record (the medical certificate and eye tests are a joke) every two years."

As an aside, FleetWatch thanks both men for taking the time and trouble to voice their observations and concerns. If there were more people who cared enough to air their views on things they feel are wrong, this industry would be a better place for all. I say this because quite a few operators have spoken to us about their dissatisfaction with the PrDP system and that is why we are highlighting it prominently here. The point is, if more operators would publicly air their views instead of containing them to one-on-one conversations, we could then get the issues on the debating tables and press for improvements.

That said, McConnell's experience on renewing his PrDP echoes what other operators have told us in the past - that it is a cumbersome procedure that wastes time and money. Four separate trips to renew a PrDP is crazy and McConnell's simple suggestion that one makes a single trip to one's local testing centre to collect all the necessary forms, pay the necessary fees and return once all the forms are completed instead of having to go back and forth like a yo-yo makes sense to us.

It is not rocket-scientist stuff and it is obvious that this is a major flaw in the system that needs to be ironed out. In this regard, FleetWatch will forward this correspondence to the correct authorities for their feedback and comment.

Whole system in doubt
Ivor Keppler's feelings, on the other hand, put the whole PrDP system in doubt - and he is not the only one who feels this way. Readers will pick up a hint of scepticism in his comment that "the medical certificate and eye tests are a joke". On this point, FleetWatch queries whether or not the original intention of the PrDP is actually being achieved. I say this because the eye tests we conducted in partnership with Engen showed up some drivers whose eyesight was way below the required standard -and those drivers had supposedly been through a full medical which included an eye-test for the renewal of their PrDPs.

One of the reasons for changing from the previous Public Driving Permits (PDP) to the PrDP was to include a full medical examination to ensure healthy drivers occupied our roads. Our eye test survey showed that, on this front, there are drivers with sub-standard eyesight. How they are getting through the test is anyone's guess. 

FleetWatch has, in the past, made the suggestion that a register of medical doctors be compiled and only those on the register be 'licensed' to do medicals on truck drivers. Those doctors would know the importance - especially from a safety point of view - of having a medically fit driver behind the wheel of a rig and will therefore not overlook any procedure or ailment that does not ensure full medical compliance. Airline pilots have this system in place so why not truck drivers? 

Keppler's statement that it wastes time and money is backed by McConnell's experience. But is it, as he says, a money-making racket? Certainly it brings big bucks into the Government's coffers as evidenced by the fact that, according to the Road Traffic Management Corporation's Road Traffic Report April 2006, the number of PrDP's issued over a year increased by 25 151 (4,09%) from 614 761 in 2005 to 639 912 at the end of April 2006.

Interesting is that the number of PrDP's that expired for four months or longer decreased by 4 081 (4,48%) from 91 180 in 2005 to 87 099 at the end of April 2006. The report states that these expired PrDP's represents 13,61% of all PrDP's issued and that the estimated amount in outstanding fees in this regard is in the order of R5,88-million.

So here we go back to school. If 87 099 PrDP's represent outstanding fees of R5,88-million, how much do 639 912 PrDP's represent in Rand terms? You do the sums. There's no doubt about it, it is big buck territory but is it, as Keppler says, a money-making racket - or is it the right system to have in place?
 

Our eye test survey conducted in partner- ship with Engen showed up drivers with sub- standard eyesight and who, had supposedly, been through a full medical which included an eyetest for the renewal of the PrDP’s?

Let us know
As mentioned, it's been some time now that the PrDP system has been in place and that's given you, Mr Operator - and your drivers - time to have lived with it. So what are your experiences with PrDP's? Do you, for a start, think they are necessary? Are there flaws that could be tidied up to improve the system? Let us know and we'll share your views with our readers and where pertinent, will pass them on to the relevant authorities for comment.

With us highlighting PrDP's in this article, we are also publishing statistics on PrDP's in South Africa released by the Road Traffic Management Corporation in its April 2006 Road Safety Report. Have a look at the tables and charts for they make for interesting reading.

On this point, FleetWatch would like to congratulate the RTMC on the compilation of its Road Traffic Report April 2006. We have, for this purpose, just taken out the section on PrDP's but the report itself contains a wealth of useful information on a number of other pertinent issues and it is really great to be able to get some current and hands-on stats instead of dealing with historical figures that go back years - or no figures at all - as has been the case in the past. As my good friend and colleague Dave Scott always says: "If you can't measure, you can't manage."

Hopefully, the April 2006 Road Safety Report is just one of many we will see emanating from the corridors of the RTMC. Up to now we haven't seen anything of much worth coming from this body. Let this be the start of good things to come. It's the way to go!