CPC Driver in the EU: Implementation Status Directive 2003/59 on the initial qualification and periodic training of drivers of certain road vehicles for the carriage of passengers & goods Gary Bridgeman Project Manager IRU Permanent Delegation to the EU Millbrook, 4 th October 2012

Agenda 1.Essential Elements of the Directive and its implementation in the EU. 2.The EC Report on the Transposition of the Directive. 3.The STARTS Project, issues of concern key and recommendations. 4.Conclusions what the sector needs! (c) IRU Academy 2012

Article 3: Qualification and Training Source: EC DG Transport Transposition

Initial qualification process Option 1: course attendance and test Option 1: course attendance and test Option 2: test only Option 2: test only Both systems Both systems (c) IRU Academy 2012

Article 8: Certifying Periodic Training Vehicle: C1, C1+E and C, C+E (c) IRU Academy 2012 Periodic Training & Transition Periods Source: EC DG Transport Unknown IT EL “Until 2016 the date of issuance of the driving licence will be taken into account for checking the acquired rights of the concerned drivers”

Article 10: Community Code (c) IRU Academy 2011 Community Code Source: EC DG Transport

(c) IRU Academy 2012 IRU Academy/CIECA – Survey on CPC Driver Implementation

EC Report on Transposition of Dir. 2003/59/EC Published 12 July Reiterates existing knowledge.Published 12 July Reiterates existing knowledge. Key conclusions:Key conclusions: EU Driver Training Committee to adopt guidelines for MS on the application of exemptions via article 2.EU Driver Training Committee to adopt guidelines for MS on the application of exemptions via article 2. Big differences between MS in: training programme design; teaching method; class size; technology and requirements to become an instructor or approved training centre.Big differences between MS in: training programme design; teaching method; class size; technology and requirements to become an instructor or approved training centre. Equivalence of qualification guaranteed by minimum requirements of annex 1 of the Directive.Equivalence of qualification guaranteed by minimum requirements of annex 1 of the Directive. No major problems in cross border enforcement.No major problems in cross border enforcement. EU Social Partners should join EU Driver Training CommitteeEU Social Partners should join EU Driver Training Committee (c) IRU Academy 2012

The project partnership recognises the indispensability of high quality training for developing an efficient, properly skilled, safe and sustainable workforce in commercial road transport. The purpose of this project is to identify the most important challenges and best solutions for improving the provision of training to drivers and workers performing certain non mobile, logistics related tasks.   A detailed study on the implementation impact and challenges of Directive 2003/59/EC (driver training pillar) (c) IRU Academy 2012 STARTS: Skills, Training and the Road Transport Sector

(c) IRU Academy 2011 STARTS: Skills, Training and the Road Transport Sector

CPC Mutual Recognition “The very varied degrees of the quality of training and training curricula are still a major obstacle to mutual recognition” Problems of mutual recognition for initial qualification in Denmark, Denmark, Hungary, Hungary, Lithuania Lithuania Sweden Sweden “Mutual recognition of the periodic training seems to be a more ticklish issue, above all when the training is not fully completed“ (c) IRU Academy 2012

Evidence of (partial) periodic training carried out in other member state Main reasons are: lack of checking validity, comparing subject modules, etc… (c) IRU Academy 2012 Accepted, but evidence will be checkedNot accepted AustriaBelgium (partial) CroatiaCzech Republic CyprusFinland EstoniaFrance GermanyHungary Great Britain and Northern IrelandLatvia IrelandPoland MaltaSweden The Netherlands Norway Slovenia Switzerland

(c) IRU Academy 2012 Training capabilities “Member States which already had training facilities seem to have fewer problems to implement the Directive and the training operators could more easily deliver the training in compliance with the requirements of the Directive. In the Member States which had not had any type of training in the past, it must set it up from scratch and some are confronted with financial and time-related problems.”

In-house training 14 AllowedNot allowed Austria Belgium  Bulgaria  Czech Republic  Cyprus  Denmark  Estonia  Finland  France  Germany  Hungary  Italy  Lithuania  Luxembourg  Netherlands  Portugal  Romania  Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain  Sweden  United Kingdom  Allowed Not allowed

(c) IRU Academy 2011 Training capabilities & qualification   Training Capabilities “Despite a general increase in training capabilities, the provision of training remains inadequate in some Member States and driving schools were called upon to bring a solution to this problem.”   Instructor qualification “Becoming a trainer for initial qualification and/or periodic training is dependent on several conditions that differ from one State to another, with criteria such as age or experience which come into play in some States, but also such as a prior initial training.”

(c) IRU Academy 2012 Training Programmes “Respondents have reported failures in the training programs of their member states”. In some occurrences this was due to a poor quality trainer profile.” “Therefore, the principle of the Directive 2003/59, which aims at driver professionalisation by adopting a better driving behaviour acquired during training sessions, such as safe and economically driving courses, is misguided since periodic training is used only as a business opportunity for training operators. “

(c) IRU Academy 2012 Training or right to drive?   Training Centres “Too often for most of the training organisations the aim of periodic training is not transmitting or promoting skill acquisition, but delivering a certificate which will allow trainees to continue exercising, the content and quality of training remain irrelevant.”

Initial Qualification Costs Training + Test Option The costs indicated refer to training / selling prices applied to candidates without funding. 18

(c) IRU Academy 2012 Training fees Initial Training - Cat. C ContributorPercentage Local and/or regional authorities8,3% Employment agencies16.70% The company16,7% The Driver58.30% Total100%

Periodic Training Costs 20 Periodic training average tariffs (without financing mechanisms) range from an average of 70 € in Romania to 1000 € in Luxemburg.

(c) IRU Academy 2012 Training fees Periodic Training - Cat. C ContributorPercentage Employment agencies7% The company and the driver7% The company50% The Driver36% Total100%

(c) IRU Academy 2012 Periodic training – who bears the cost? The driverBoth driver & employerEmployer Cyprus, Czech Republic, Latvia, Malta (env.), Northern Ireland, Belgium, Croatia, Estonia, Germany, Great Britain, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Slovenia, Switzerland Finland: in 95% of the cases, Sweden, France

STARTS Conclusions (key points) Diversity in the Directive’s transposition is necessary and positive as long as it does not undermine the legislation’s objectives.Diversity in the Directive’s transposition is necessary and positive as long as it does not undermine the legislation’s objectives. The EC must enforce CPC mutual recognition among MS. But mutual recognition is based on confidence in equivalent standards of training & testing between MS.The EC must enforce CPC mutual recognition among MS. But mutual recognition is based on confidence in equivalent standards of training & testing between MS. MS must develop a quality assurance systems for training institutes, curricula, trainers and inspectors, as well as step up their coordination, approval and audit.MS must develop a quality assurance systems for training institutes, curricula, trainers and inspectors, as well as step up their coordination, approval and audit. The EU should develop and information exchange system to build mutual confidenceThe EU should develop and information exchange system to build mutual confidence (c) IRU Academy 2012

STARTS Conclusions (key points) MS should ease entry of new drivers, by implementing the Directive without imposing unnecessary burdens on companies and drivers.MS should ease entry of new drivers, by implementing the Directive without imposing unnecessary burdens on companies and drivers. The road transport sector has not found a uniformly suitable model for the financing of periodic driver training and qualifications.The road transport sector has not found a uniformly suitable model for the financing of periodic driver training and qualifications. MS should provide more financial incentives to companies, drivers, job applicants, the unemployed and older workers to continue their development or acquire entrance level skills and qualificationsMS should provide more financial incentives to companies, drivers, job applicants, the unemployed and older workers to continue their development or acquire entrance level skills and qualifications (c) IRU Academy 2011

(c) IRU Academy 2012 More information? IRU Academy/CIECA Survey: STARTS’ project:

(c) IRU Academy 2012 Professional Road Transport Training Industry Needs In order to answer to the training development challenges, the industry has a: Need for technical knowledge and teaching skills Need to ensure the use of best practice Need for quality training to impact on road safety and image of the profession Need to ensure knowledge transfer Need to encourage mobility opportunities Need to establish a pan European network of instructors

(c) IRU Academy 2012 Professional Road Transport Training Industry Needs Benefits Help countries raise the professional level of both instructors and drivers Provide harmonised professional driver training Provide relevant tools enabling to perform CPC Driver training Aim for EU recognition of CPC Driver instructor qualifications Speak with one voice in road transport training delivery Save money

(c) IRU Academy 2012