1. CPC Driver in the EU: Implementation Status
DAME I GOSPODO, DOBRO JUTRO   I’M AFRAID THAT IS BASICALLY ALL THE SERBO CROAT I CAN PROBABLY FIT INTO LINGUITICALLY CHALLENGED HEAD. SO I AM AFRAID THAT I MUST RESORT TO THAT THAT MIXED UP KNOWN AS ENGLISH, WHICH CAN’T DECIDE WHETHER ITS FRENCH, GERMAN, DUTCH, AMERICAN OR EVEN A LITTLE BIT INDIAN.
WHAT I CAN SAY WITHOUT ANY CONFUSION IS THAT IT IS A REAL PLEASURE TO BE HERE IN CROATION ON THE 9 DECEMBER 2011, A MOMENTOUS DAY ON WHICH THIS COUNTRY WILL SIGN ITS EU ACCESSSION TREATY IN BRUSSELS, AND THUS BECOME THE EU’S 28TH MEMBER STATE IN JULY  LADIES AND GENTLEMEN WELCOME TO THE FAMILIY THAT DOES NOT ALWAYS AGREE. IS THERE ANY OTHER SORT
ITS TRUE THAT THE EU IS CURRENTLY GOING THROUGH A VERY DIFFICULT PERIOD. HOWEVER, WHEN I THINK OF CROATIA’S SCIENTIFIC CONTRIBUTION VIA ANDRIJA MOHOROVICIC A PIONEER OF SIESMOLOGY AND FAUST VARANCIC WHO INVENTED THE PARACHUTE I CAN’T THINK OF A BETTER TIME FOR CROATIA TO LEND A HAND.
INDEED WE SHOULD NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE HUMAN ELEMENT IN ANY ENDEAVOUR ABOVE ALL IN ROAD TRANSPORT. WITHOUT INDIVIDUALS WITH THE RIGHT SKILLS AND TALENTS OUR WORKFORCE AND OUR SECTOR CEASES TO EXIST. AND THAT IS WHY TODAY IS A PERFECT TIME TO TALK ABOUT THE DRIVER TRAINING DIRECTIVE.
SO IN THIS PRESENTATION I AM GOING PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THE DIRECTIVE’S CURRENT STATE OF IMPLEMENTATION IN THE EU, SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WE ARE FACING AND OUR EFFORTS TO ENSURE WE KNOW HOW TO OPTIMISE THE POSITIVE POTENTIAL OF THIS DIRECTIVE FOR OUR SECTOR, DESPITE THE LEGISLATIONS VERY VARIED TRANSPOSITION ACROSS THE EU.
OF COURSE DIVERSITY IS IN ESSENCE A GOOD THING. PROGRESS AND GOOD IDEAS RARELY RESULTS FROM UNIFORMITY. PLUS MEMBER STATES ARE NOT IDENTICAL. THEY HAVE DIFFERENT NEEDS AND PRIORITIES. HENCE THESE EU RULES WERE PASSED AS A DIRECTIVE AND NOT AS A REGULATION. HOWEVER, DIVERSITY SHOULD NOT UNDERMINE THE OBJECTIVES OF THIS LEGISLATION.
ITS WORTHWHILE AT THIS STAGE TO REMIND OURSELVES OF WHAT THOSE OBJECTIVES ARE.
THE DIRECTIVE ORIGINATES IN ITS MAIN GOALS OF THE EU LEGISLATION ARE TO ESTABLISH A MINIMUM LEVEL OF DRIVER COMPETENCE AND THEREBY IMPROVE ROAD SAFETY, ENSURE THAT ALL DRIVERS CAN MEET THE DEMANDS OF THEIR JOB AND AS EVER HARMONISE RULES TO AVOID UNFAIR COMPETITION.
THE DIRECTIVE APPLIES TO ALL EU CITIZENS AND NON-EU CITIZENS ALIKE WHEREVER THEY ARE EMPLOYED BY A COMPANY REGISTERED WITHIN THE EU. IT COVERS ALL COMMERCIAL GOODS AND PASSENGER TRANSPORT DRIVERS WHO NEED C, D AND E CATERGORY LICENCES FOR THEIR WORK.
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
Paris, 7 June 2012
Damian Viccars
Head - Social Affairs
and EU Road Safety
(c) IRU Academy 2012

2. Transposing the Directive
(c) IRU Academy 2011

3. Implementation: a shared responsability
Member State
Social partners
Trainers
Company
Drivers
The professional driver is at the heart of a set of systems implying a multiplicity of stakeholders: the company, trainers, the social partners, Member States and the EU.
Penalties to drivers

4. Consultation of social Partners
Cooperation in designing training programmes and financing drivers training:
Member State
Designing the training programmes
Financing the drivers training
Austria ü
Belgium
France
Hungary
Lithuania
Luxemburg
Netherlands
Spain
Sweden
United Kingdom

5. Consultation focused on a variety of topics
Choice of the initial qualification:
training + test;
or test only.
Choice for the recording of the qualification:
code 95 on the driving license
Issuance of a Driver qualification card.
Training programme:
uniform programme prepared by competent authority.
or different programmes prepared by each training centre);
Financing of training:

6. Source: EC DG Transport
Transposition
Article 3: Qualification and Training
THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL DECISION THAT MEMBER STATES HAVE TO MAKE CONCERNS THE SYSTEM FOR QUALIFICATION. THE DIRECTIVE ALLOWS TWO ROUTES.
THE FIRST APPROACH IS THAT MEMBER STATES AWARD A CPC AFTER A NEW DRIVER UNDERTAKES A COMPULSORY NUMBER OF HOURS TRAINING FOLLOWED BY A TEST.
THE SECOND ROUTE FOR NEW DRIVERS, IS FOR MEMBER STATES TO AWARD A CPC AFTER A DRIVER HAS PASSED AN EXAMINATION WITHOUT COMPULSORY TRAINING. THIS WAS NOT CONTAINED IN THE COMMISSION’S ORIGINAL PROPOSAL. IT WAS INTRODUCED BY EU MEMBER STATES WHO FELT THAT THE ORIGINAL COMMISSION APPROACH WAS TOO PRESCRIPTIVE FOR AN EU DIRECTIVE.
THE TRAINING + TEST OPTION SPECIFIES A STANDARD 280 HOURS OF TRAINING. AT LEAST 20 HOURS MUST BE SPENT BY THE CANDIDATE RECEIVING INDIVIDUAL DRIVING TUITION WITH AN INSTRUCTOR AND 8 OF THESE HOURS CAN BE SPENT ON A DRIVING SIMULATOR. AFTER HIS TRAINING THE DRIVER NEEDS TO PASS A KNOWLEDGE TEST TO DEMONSTRATE HIS COMPETENCE.
THE EXAM ONLY ROUTE REQUIRES A DRIVER TO PASS A SIX HOUR THEORY AND PRACTICAL EXAMINATION WHICH INCLUDES AT LEAST 2 HOURS OF PRACTICAL TESTS. AGAIN THE BASIS FOR PASSING THIS EXAM WILL BE A THOROUGH KNOWLEDGE OF THE SUBJECTS CONTAINED IN THE DIRECTIVE.
AS YOU CAN SEE THE EU IS FAIRLY EVENLY SPLIT THESE OPTIONS. BUT THE COMPULSORY TRAINING ROUTE IS SLIGHTLY MORE POPULAR.
IT IS ALSO INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT BOTH SLOVENIA AND GERMANY HAVE MADE BOTH QUALIFICATION ROUTES AVAILABLE TO DRIVERS.
Source: EC DG Transport
(c) IRU Academy 2011

7. Initial qualification process
Option 1: course attendance and test
Option 2: test only
Both systems
HERE ON THIS SLIDE YOU CAN SEE THESE DIFFERENCES HIGHLIGHTED MORE CLEARLY ON A MAP OF EUROPE.
THOSE COUNTRIES WITH THE EXAM ONLY OPTION ARE COLOURED RED. THOSE WITH COMPULSORY TRAINING, IN BLUE. GERMANY AND SLOVENIA AS YOU CAN SEE ARE SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN.
I THINK THERE IS A CLEAR DIFFERENCE IN PHILOSOPHY HERE. FOR SOME COUNTRIES, IT IS ENOUGH THAT DRIVERS CAN DEMONSTRATE THEIR COMPETENCE WITHOUT PRESCRIBING HOW THAT COMPETENCE SHOULD BE GAINED.
OF COURSE THE KEY THEN, IS THAT THE TESTING MUST BE EXTREMELY RIGOROUS TO ENSURE THAT CANDIDATES REALY DO HAVE THE SKILLS.
IN FACT WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IS THAT PASS RATES FOR THE INITIAL QUALIFICATIONS TEND TO BE HIGHER IN MS WITH A MANDATORY COURSE FOLLOWED BY A ‘TEST’, RATHER THAN EXAM PASS ONLY REGIMES.
CONSEQUENTLY EVEN IN ‘EXAM ONLY’ MEMBER STATES – AT LEAST WHERE EXAMS ARE TRULY RIGOROUS - WE MAY EXPECT A GROWING AMOUNT OF PREPARATORY TRAINING SESSIONS TO GET CANDIDATES TO PASSTHE BY DEFINITION TOUGHER EXAM FORM OF APPRAISAL.
IT SEEMS TO SUGGEST AT LEAST, DIFFERENT ROUTES TO THE SAME GOAL
(c) IRU Academy 2011

8. Initial Qualification
Article 5: Age limits
Drivers of vehicles intended for the carriage of goods may drive:
From the age of 18:
accelerated initial qualification C1, C1+E (art 6.2)
initial qualification C, C+E (art 6.1)
From the age of 21:
accelerated initial qualification C, C+E (art 6.2)
NEXT ON THIS SLIDE IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT SECTIONS OF THE DIRECTIVE, THE MINIMUM AGES FOR DRIVERS TO OBTAIN DIFFERENT LICENCE CATEGORIES.
THESE ARE THE PROVISIONS FOR GOODS TRANSPORT DRIVERS.
SO ON THE BASIS OF AN ACCELERATED INITIAL QUALIFICATION, AN 18 YEAR OLD CAN QUALIFY TO DRIVE A CATEGORY C1 VEHICLE, OR C1 + E VEHICLE COMBINATION.
ALTERNATIVELY FOR THOSE UNDERGOING THE BASIC INITIAL QUALIFICATION, IT IS POSSIBLE FROM THE SAME AGE TO DRIVE A C OR C + E VEHICLE.
AND THEN FROM THE AGE OF 21 THIS ALSO BECOMES POSSIBLE UNDER THE ACCELERATED INITIAL QUALIFICATION TOO.
Source: EC DG Transport
(c) IRU Academy 2011

9. Periodic Training & Transition Periods
Article 8: Certifying Periodic Training
Vehicle: C1, C1+E and C, C+E
HAVING LOOKED AT NEW DRIVERS AND THE INITIAL QUALIFICATION, WHAT ABOUT THE OBLIGATIONS FOR DRIVERS WHO ACQUIRED THEIR LICENCES BEFORE THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE DIRECTIVE .
HERE THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT IS THE OBLIGATION TO UNDERGO 35 HOURS PERIODIC TRAINING. PERIODIC TRAINIG MUST BE TAKEN IN BLOCKS OF NO LESS THAN 7 HOURS AND SHOULD COVER THE SUBJECTS INCLUDED IN THE DIRECTIVE. AGAIN TRAINING MUST BE CARRIED OUR BY AN GOVERNMNET AUTHORISED ORGANISATION. BUT FOR PERIODIC TRAINING NO TEST IS REQUIRED.
HAVING SAID THAT, WE ARE INFORMED THAT ROMANIA, ESTONIA, CYPRUS AND HUNGARY HAVE INTRODUCED A TEST AT THE END OF EACH PERIODIC TRAINING SESSION.
HOWEVER, THE MOST NOTICEABLE DIFFERENCES ARE IN THE DEADLINES FOR COMPLETING THIS TRAINING.
HERE ON THIS SLIDE YOU CAN SEE THE PERIODIC TRAINING DEADLINES FOR TRUCK DRIVERS. THESE DATES RANGE BETWEEN 2012 IN COUNTRIES LIKE HUNGARY, ESTONIA AND FRANCE, TO 2016 IN COUNTRIES SUCH AS THE NETHERLANDS SPAIN AND BELGIUM WITH A NUMBER OF OTHERS IN BETWEEN.
AS YOU CAN SEE THE MOST COMMON DEADLINE IS 2014 – EXACTLY 5 YEARS AFTER THE DIRECTIVE CAME INTO FORCE FOR GOODS TRANSPORT DRIVERS.
THIS WAS THE BASIC REQUIREMENT IN THE DIRECTIVE, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE A NUMBER OF COUNTRIES TOOK THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXTEND THESE DEADLINES IN CONNECTION TO THE RENEWAL PERIOD OF THE DRIVER LICENCE.
“Until 2016 the date of issuance of the driving licence will be taken into account for checking the acquired rights of the concerned drivers”
Unknown IT EL
Source: EC DG Transport
(c) IRU Academy 2011

10. Periodic Training & Transition Periods
Article 8: Certifying Periodic Training
Vehicle: D1, D1+E and D, D+E
HERE ARE THE RESPECTIVE PERIODIC TRAINING DEADLINES FOR BUS AND COACH DRIVERS. THE SAME BASIC RULES ARE APPLICABLE HERE WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT THE DEADLINES ARE 1 YEAR EARLIER THAN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT.
THE MAIN CONCERN WE HAVE IN RELATION TO THESE DIFFERENCES RELATES TO CROSS-BORDER ENFORCEMENT – SOMETHING WE’LL COME BACK TO LATER.
IN SHORT HOW TO ENSURE THAT A BELGIAN, SWEDISH OR ROMANIAN DRIVER WHO DOES NOT HAVE TO COMPLETE PERIODIC TRAINING UNTIL 2015, IS NOT NEVERTHLESS FINED OR STOPPED IN A COUNTRY LIKE FRANCE OR THE CZECH REPUBLIC WHICH HAS ITS PERIODIC TRAINING DEADLINE ALREADY IN AS YOU CAN IMAGINE WE ARE VERY KEEN TO AVOID THIS SITUATION SINCE IT COULD DISRUPT FREE MOVEMENT WITHIN THE EU.
IN THEORY THIS SHOULD NOT POSE A PROBLEM. A DECISION OF MEMBER STATE EXPERTS IN THE EU DRIVER LICENCE COMMITTEE WAS TAKEN UNDER WHICH THEY AGREED TO RESPECT EACH COUNTRIES DEADLINES.
HERE THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THE DRIVER LICENCE WILL BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, REFLECT ING THE FACT THAT MEMBER STATES MAY HAVE USED THIS TO INTRODUCE LONGER TIME FRAMES FOR PERIODIC AVAILABILITY.
NEVERTHELESS AS WE KNOW FROM SO MUCH OTHER LEGISLATION ENFORCEMENT PRACTICE NEEDS TO BE CAREFULLY MONITORED.
“Until 2015 the date of issuance of the driving licence will be taken into account for checking the acquired rights of the concerned drivers”
Unknown IT EL
Source: EC DG Transport
(c) IRU Academy 2011

11. Source: EC DG Transport
Community Code
Article 10: Community Code
ONE LAST KEY AREA OF TRANSPOSITION WHERE MEMBER STATES HAVE ADOPTED DIFFERENT APROACHES CONCERNS THE PROOF OF CPC ENTITLEMENT.
HERE YOU CAN SEE HOW 9 COUNTRIES SUCH AS GERMANY, FINLAND, PORTUGAL AND SLOVAKIA HAVE CHOSEN TO PLACE THE COMMUNITY CODE NUMBER 94 ON THE DRIVING LICENCE.
HOWEVER, TWICE AS MANY COUNTRIES HAVE CHOSEN TO ISSUE CPC HOLDERS WITH A SEPARATE CARD.
EQUALLY. FOUR MS - GERMANY, FINLAND, LITHUANIA AND SLOVENIA - HAVE INTRODUCED BOTH OPTIONS.
BEARING ALL THESE ISSUES IN MIND IT COULD BE THAT SOME FORM OF EU DATA EXCHANGE MECHANISM SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED TO SHARE INFORMATION RELATING TO A DRIVER’S QUALIFICATIONS, EU MEMBER STATE DEADLINES AND DOCUMENTS IN ORDER TO REDUCE POTENTIAL ENFORCEMENT PROBLEMS.
IT COULD ALSO BE A GOOD MECHANISM FOR IMPROVING MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF TRAINING SESSIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS.
SO THIS WAS AN OVERVIEW OF THE DIRECTIVE’S BASIC IMPLEMENTATION. THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION IS DUE SOON TO PUBLISH A REVIEW OF THE TRANSPOSITION BY MS. HOWEVER, WE HAVE NEVER EXPECTED THIS TO BE A VERY DEEP ANALYSIS AND THAT IS WHY THE IRU HAS EMBARKED ON A NUMBER OF PROJECTS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND HOW THE INDUSTRY IS RESPONDING TO THE DIRECTIVE AND HOW THINGS CAN BE IMPROVED.
Source: EC DG Transport
(c) IRU Academy 2011

12. STARTS: Skills, Training and the Road Transport Sector
The project partnership recognise 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 therefore to correctly identify the most important challenges and the most efficacious 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)
THE STARTS PROJECT IS AN EC FUNDED INITIATIVE OF THE EU SOCIAL PARTNERS FOR ROAD TRANSPORT. THAT IS IRU AND THE EUROPEAN TRANSPORT WORKERS FEDERATION
TOGETHER WITH A CONSORTIUM OF IRU AND ETF MEMBERS PLUS A RESEARCH TEAM, OUR PROJECT IS LOOKING IN DETAIL AT THE CHALLENGES OF TRAINING FOR ALL ROAD TRANSPORT WORKERS.
IT IS WORTH NOTING THAT THIS IS ONE AREA WHERE WE HAVE A STRONG CONSENSUS WITH OUR TRADE UNION PARTNERS.
AS EMPLOYERS WE KNOW THAT ONLY WITH A HIGHLY SKILLED AND WELL TRAINED WORKFORCE THAT CAN WE PROVIDE THE SERVICES CLIENTS NEED. WE ALSO KNOW THAT INVESTMENT IN TRAINING IS A KEY MEANS TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN A DECENT WORKFORCE.
ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE EQUATION ETF ALSO RECOGNISES THAT TRAINING CAN BE A DECISIVE MEANS TO IMPROVE WORKING CONDITIONS AND IMPROVE WORKER’S LONG TERM EMPLOYMENT PROSPECTS.
PLUS, WE BOTH UNDERSTAND THAT COSTS OF TRAINING AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDENS SHOULD IN NO WAY BE UNDERESTIMATED, ESPECIALLY FOR THE SMALL AND MICRO SIZED COMPANIES IN OUR SECTOR AND IN A TIME OF DEEP ECONOMIC CRISIS.
THEREFORE WE BOTH HAVE AN INTEREST TO IDENTIFY HOW TRAINING CAN BE DELIVERED IN The MOST EFFECTIVE AND COST EFFICIENT WAY.
OVERALL THE PROJECT LOOKS AT TRAINING FOR BOTH MOBILE AND NON-MOBILE LOGISTICS WORKERS. NATURALLY FOR MOBILE WORKERS WE ARE FOCUSING ON DIRECTIVE 2003/59.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

13. STARTS: Skills, Training and the Road Transport Sector
THIS IS THE PROJECT HOMEPAGE OF THE STARTS WEBSITE WHICH YOU CAN ALL VISIT. IT HAS DETAILED INFORMATION ON BOTH PILLARS OF THE PROJECT.
CONCERNING MOBILE WORKERS OUR FIRST OBJECTIVE IS TO DEVELOP A FULL OVERVIEW OF NATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS RELATED TO THE DIRECTIVE’S IMPLEMENTATION.
IN PARTICULAR THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO FOCUS ON HOW EMPLOYERS AND DRIVERS ARE ORGANISING THEMSELVES TO RESPOND TO THE DIRECTIVE’S CHALLENGES, INCLUDING COSTS AND TRAINING TIME.
THIRD WE WILL TRY TO PRODUCE AN EARLY PICTURE OF THE DIRECTIVE'S REAL IMPACT ON SKILL’S AND ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT IN ROAD TRANSPORT.
AND FINALLY IN ANOTHER VERY PRACTICAL AREA, THE PROJECT WILL BE EXAMINING THE TRANSNATIONAL DIMENSION BY LOOKING AT ENFORCEMENT ISSUES. PLUS SINCE ONE AIM OF THE DIRECTIVE WAS TO IMPROVE LABOUR MOBILITY WE WILL ALSO BE LOOKING AT THE INTERNATIONAL MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF TRAINING AND QUALIFICATIONS.
WHAT WILL THIS ACHIEVE?
HOPEFULLY A MORE DETAILED PICTURE OF HOW THE DIRECTIVE IS ACTUALLY BEING IMPLEMENTED IN THE REAL WORLD, TO GIVE US THE POSSIBILITY TO IDENTIFY SOLUTIONS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF OUR KNOWLEDGE.
SECOND WE SHOULD THEN HAVE A LIST OF CONCRETE CONCERNS AND PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CAN BE DELIVERED TO THE EC.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

14. IRU Academy/CIECA – Survey on CPC Driver Implementation
OF COURSE WE ARE NOT STARTING FROM SCRATCH. THE IRU ACADEMY AND ITS PARTNERS CIECA HAVE CARRIED OUT A NUMBER OF ACTIVITIES TO INCREASE OUR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT HOW THE DIRECTIVE IS BEING APPLIED IN PRACTICE.
THERE WAS ALSO A DRIVER COMPETENCE SEMINAR THAT MANY OF YOU WILL REMEMBER THAT TOOK PLACE IN BRUSSELS IN JANUARY 2010 WHICH WAS SUCCESSFUL IN POOLING A LOT OF EXPERTISE AND KNOWLEDGE ON THE SUBJECT.
COLLECTIVELY ALL THESE ACTIVITIES ARE BRINGING TO OUR ATTENTION A LARGE NUMBER OF ISSUES THAT NO DOUBT YOU TOO ARE ENCOUNTERING AND WHICH WE SHOULD SPEND SOME TME CONSIDERING IN THE NEXT PART OF THIS PRESENTATION.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

15. 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,
Hungary,
Lithuania
Sweden
“Mutual recognition of the periodic training seems to be a more ticklish issue, above all when the training is not fully completed“
THE FIRST ISSUE TO THINK ABOUT AND WHICH IS A CAUSE FOR CONCERN IS THE LACK OF MUTUAL RECOGNITION FOR TRAINING CARRIED OUT IN DIFFERENT MEMBER STATES.
SOME STATES ARE CLEARLY SCEPTICAL ABOUT THE QUALITY OF TRAINING THAT IS CARRIED OUT ABROAD.
THE DIRECTIVE REQUIRES THE MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF CPC, BUT EVEN HERE THERE ARE SOME ISSUES HERE IN CERTAIN COUNTRIES.
WHAT IS EVEN MORE DIFFICULT WHEN STATES ARE REQUESTED TO RECOGNISE TRAINING THAT HAS BEEN UNDERTAKEN IN ONE COUNTRY WHEN IT AMOUNTS TO LESS THAN 35 HOURS.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

16. Evidence of (partial) periodic training carried out in other member state
Main reasons are:
lack of checking validity, comparing subject modules, etc…
Accepted, but evidence will be checked
Not accepted
Austria
Belgium (partial)
Croatia
Czech Republic
Cyprus
Finland
Estonia
France
Germany
Hungary
Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Latvia
Ireland
Poland
Malta
Sweden
The Netherlands
Norway
Slovenia
Switzerland
ON THIS SLIDE YOU HAVE EXAMPLES OF COUNTRIES THAT WILL ACCEPT EVIDENCE OF TRAINING CARRIED OUT ABROAD. AND THOSE ON THE RIGHT THAT WILL NOT.
SOME OF THE REASONS GIVEN INCLUDE A LACK OF MEANS TO CHECK THE VALIDITY OF TRAINING OR A LACK OF COMPATABILITY CONCERNING THE SUBJECT MODULES FOR TRAINING.
AGAIN SINCE EMPLOYMENT MOBILITY WAS ONE OF THE MAIN OBJECTIVES OF THE DIRECTIVE, HOW DO WE PREVENT A DRIVER WHO HAS UNDERGONE 28 HOURS OF TRAINING ALREADY IN GERMANY BEING REQUIRED TO START ALL OVER AGAIN WITH 35 HOURS TRAINING WHEN HE MOVES TO FRANCE?
SO HERE UNFORTUNATELY WE DO HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF DIVERSITY UNDERMINING OBJECTIVES OF THE LEGISLATION THAT MUST BE RESOLVED.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

17. 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.”
ANOTHER PROBLEM THAT IS BEING UNCOVERED BY OUR RESEARCH INTO THE DIRECTIVE CONCERNS INSUFFICIENT TRAINING CAPACITY.
ITS CLEAR THAT MEMBER STATES WHICH HAD TRAINING OBLIGATIONS AND FACILITIES IN PLACE BEFORE THE DIRECTIVE SEEM TO BE HAVING FEWER PROBLEMS. IN OTHER MS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF GROWING TRAINING CAPACITY SUCH AS IN BELGIUM AND BULGARIA OR A RELIANCE ON DRIVING SCHOOLS.
HOWEVER, DESPITE THE EXPANSION OF CAPACITY AND EVEN DESPITE THE EXISTING TRAINING CAPACITY THAT MAY HAVE BEEN IN PLACE BEFORE THE DIRECTIVE, THERE ARE SERIOUS CONCERNS
ACROSS A BROAD SWATHE OF COUNTRIES (INCLUDING FR, UK AND EE) THAT THE WHOLE DRIVER POPULATION WILL NOT BE ABLE TO COMPLY WITH THE FIRST DEADLINES FOR THE COMPLETION OF PERIODIC TRAINING.
MOST OF ALL THERE IS THE FEAR THAT IF EVERY COMPANY AND DRIVER PUTS OFF TRAINING UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE THERE WILL BE THE MOTHER OF ALL BOTTLENECKS AND A VERY SERIOUS DISRUPTION FOR ROAD TRANSPORT IF SUDDENLY LARGE NUMBERS OF DRIVERS CANNOT LEGALLY CARRY ON WORKING.
LUXEMBOURG HAS INSTITUTED AN REMINDER SYSTEM FOR DRIVERS. IN OTHER COUNTRIES CONTINGENCY PLANS ARE BEING CONSIDERED TO POSTPONE DEADLINES.
FORTUNATELY IN OTHER COUNTRIES SUCH AS BG, DK, DE, HU, PL AND RO, WHICH HAVE QUITE SENSIBLY ESTABLISHED SCHEDULING SYSTEMS WITH VARIABLE DEADLINES FOR COMPLETING TRAINING, DEPENDING ON FOR EXAMPLE THE VALIDITY PERIOD OF THEIR CURRENT DRIVING LICENCE, OR ANOTHER EXISTING DRIVER QUALIFICATION.
In member States such as France or the Netherlands where the training provision was already well developed, the implementation of the Directive had an impact only on the training capacities that have increased.
In member States where no vocational training tradition existed, implementation of the Directive 2003/59/EC requiring provision of training has created new training activities, encouraged the emergence of new players in drivers training and also attracted players already in place like driving schools.
Bulgaria: from 17 approved training centres in 2009 to 57 in 2010
Malta : Establishment of drivers training
UK : from 705 periodic training centres in 2009 to 979 in 2010
(c) IRU Academy 2011

18. In-house training Allowed Not allowed Austria ü Belgium Bulgaria
Allowed
Not allowed
Austria ü
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

19. Training capabilities & qualification
“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.”
SO CAPACITY AND ITS UTILISATION WILL REMAIN AN ONGOING ISSUE BUT SO WILL THE QUALITY OF THE TRAINING CAPACITY.
WE ALL KNOW THAT THAT BOTH FOR INITIAL QUALIFICATION AND PERIODIC TRAINING, SERVICE PROVIDERS MUST BE PART OF AN APPROVED TRAINING ORGANISATION OR TESTING CENTRE, WHICH THE GOVERNMENT HAS AUTHORISED.
THE DIRECTIVE GIVES BASIC GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL, BUT SOME MEMBER STATES HAVE SUPPLEMENTED THESE WITH VERY DETAILED REQUIREMENTS SUCH AS IN THE UK.
OVERALL TRAINING CENTRES ARE USUALLY CONTROLLED AT THREE STAGES: THE POINT OF APPLICATION AND APPROVAL; DURING THE DELIVERY OF THE TRAINING AND AT THE TIME OF LICENCE RENEWAL.
THE QUESTION IS HOW ROBUST IS THIS SYSTEM TO ENSURE THAT ONLY REPUTABLE TRAINING ORGANISATION GET IN AND THEN STAY IN BUSINESS.
SECOND FOR INSTRUCTORS CRITERIA SUCH AS AGE AND EXPERIENCE ARE CONSIDERED IN SOME MS.
FRANCE AND HUNGARY REQUIRE PRIOR TRAINING OF TRAINERS. AND THERE ARE A VARIETY OF PERIODIC TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAINERS, FOR EXAMPLE THREE DAYS EVERY TWO YEARS IN DENMARK OR 35 HOURS EVERY 5 YEARS IN THE UK.
UNFORTUNATELY, THIS DIVERSITY OF CRITERIA HERE MAY BE CREATING UNCERTAINTY AND ULTIMATELY A LACK OF CONFIDENCE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES IN THEIR RESPECTIVE SYSTEMS.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

20. Requirements to become a periodic training instructor
BASED ON DRIVING EXPERIENCE
 The Netherlands
Experience as professional driver or qualification comparable to driving instructor (WRM certificate);
Austria
Experience as lecturers in the apprenticeship “professional driver”
Driving school instructors for C and D licenses;
Sufficient knowledge of regulations
Education or equal practical experience.
Sweden
Two years experience in transport sector, vocational teacher or proven experience . 20

21. Requirements to a periodic training instructor
BASED ON QUALIFICATION LEVELS
 Lithuania:
Higher education,
three year work experience in road transport or road safety, not lower than C od D category driving licence
and a licence of completed pedagogical – psychological courses as described by relevant legal acts.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

22. 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. “
ITS OBVIOUS FROM SOME OF THE RESEARCH CARRIED OUT BY THE STARTS PROJECT THAT THESE CONCERNS ARE RUNNING VERY DEEP. SOME RESPONDENTS WERE REPORTING FAILURES IN WHOLE MEMBER STATE TRAINING STRATEGIES DUE TO POOR QUALITY TRAINER PROFILES.
THE WORST REPORTS SUGGEST THAT A LACK OF PROFESSIONALISM IN THE TRAINING PROVISION IS DUE TO A CERTAIN TYPE OF APPROACH ADOPTED BY SOME TRAINING ORGANISATIONS, WHERE THE BUSINESS MODEL IS NOT BASED ON THE ACQUISITION OF SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE, BUT SIMPLY TO PROVIDE THE REQUISITE PAPER WORK TO ENSURE A DRIVER CAN CONTINUE TO WORK.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

23. 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.”
AND OF COURSE IF SOME TRAINING INSITUTES ARE COMPROMISING ON QUALITY AND COMPETING ONLY ON PRICE THIS WILL RUIN THE MARKET FOR THOSE WHO DO WISH TO BASE THEIR BUSINESS MODEL ON QUALITY TRAINING.
AND THIS IN TURN WILL ALSO RUIN THE POSSIBILITIES FOR COMPANIES WHO WANT TO INVEST IN TRAINING ON THE EXPECTATION THAT THEY WILL RECEIVE A RETURN ON THAT INVESTMENT IN THE FORM OF A MORE SKILLED, BETTER MOTIVATED AND MORE EFFICIENT WORKFORCE.
IF WE ALLOW THIS SITUATION TO TAKE HOLD IT WOULD BE ANOTHER CLEAR EXAMPLE OF HOW VARIED AND SOMETIMES LAX APPLICATION OF THE DIRECTIVE COULD CONTRIBUTE TO A COMPLETE UNDERMINING THE LEGISLATION AND ITS AIM OF BOOSTING THE PROFESSIONALISM OF THE SECTOR.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

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

25. Training fees Initial Training - Cat. C Contributor Percentage
Local and/or regional authorities
8,3%
Employment agencies
16.70%
The company
16,7%
The Driver
58.30%
Total
100%
ON FUNDING TRAINING, OUR RESEARCH ACTIVITIES ARE REVEALING A COMPLEX PICTURE.
ON THIS SLIDE YOU HAVE PERCENTAGES SHOWING WHO PAYS FOR THE INITIAL TRAINING OF CATEGORY C LICENCE HOLDERS.
HERE ITS CLEAR. IN THE VAST MAJORITY OF CASES IT’S THE DRIVER THAT PAYS FOR HIS RIGHT TO ENTER THE INDUSTRY.
ON THE OTHER HAND COMPANIES, REGIONAL AUTHORITIES AND EMPLOYMENT AGENCIES ARE SUBSIDISING A REASONABLE PROPORTION OF THE COSTS. BUT I DEFINITELY THINK THERE IS SCOPE FOR THAT FIGURE TO INCREASE ESPECIALLY IF WE ARE TO IMPROVE THE RECRUITMENT OF YOUNG DRIVERS INTO THE PROFESSION.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

26. Periodic Training Costs
Periodic training average tariffs (without financing mechanisms) range from an average of 70 € in Romania to 1000 € in Luxemburg.
WHEN YOU LOOK TO THE COST OF TRAINING IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES AGAIN THERE ARE LARGE DIFFERENCES - UP TO A FACTOR OF 5 - BETWEEN A COUNTRY LIKE NORTHERN IRELAND AND SLOVENIA.
IN GENERAL WE HAVE FOUND THAT THE COST OF TRAINING IS SET BY THE TRAINING PROVIDER, SO THE MARKET IS THE DOMINANT FORCE IN SETTING RATES – WHETHER THAT BE A FACTOR OF SOCIO ECONOMIC DIFFERENCES WITHIN THE EU, THE SERVICE OFFER ITSELF OR SIMPLY SUPPLY AND DEMAND ISSUES
A broad variety of situations co-exists in Europe: the State, the companies and/or the drivers contribute to finance the periodic training.
In Member States that have a long tradition in vocational training involving also social partners:
Funding mechanisms of vocational training existed before implementation of Directive 2003/59, mechanisms in which compulsory training have naturally found their places;
Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain, France, …
Other States have set up specific mechanisms resulting from the consultation : in Luxemburg, periodic training costs are shared between the State (1/3) and the company (2/3)
In Member States where vocational training systems are under development, funding are based on the driver and/or the company: in Estonia and Romania (and eastern Member States), in most cases, the driver bears the cost but it happens that the company and the driver share it under conditions

27. Training fees Periodic Training - Cat. C Contributor Percentage
Employment agencies 7%
The company and the driver
The company
50%
The Driver
36%
Total
100%
WITH THE PAYMENT OF PERIODIC TRAINING, THE PERCENTAGE OF FEES PAID FOR BY THE DRIVER IS MUCH LOWER WHILE THE PERCENTAGE PAID BY THE COMPANY IS HIGHER, AS ONE WOULD EXPECT.
HOWEVER, THE ABSENCE OF A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION AT LEAST FROM REGIONAL AUTHORITIES IS REGRETTABLE, PARTICULARLY CONSIDERING THE IMPORTANCE OF DEVELOPING THE SKILLS OF THE MAJORITY OF THE WORK FORCE – ESPECIALLY SAFETY AND ECO DRIVING SKILLS WHICH BENEFITS THE WHOLE OF SOCIETY – AND ALSO NOT TO MENTION THE FUNDAMENTAL REQUIREMENT FOR ENOUGHDRIVERS TO KEEP SOCIETIES DISTRIBUTION AND MOBILITY NEEDS SERVED.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

28. Periodic training – who bears the cost?
The driver
Both driver & employer
Employer
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
AND HERE YOU CAN SEE THAT THE DIFFERENCES INCREASE WHEN YOU COMPARE WHO BEARS THE COSTS OF PERIODIC TRAINING IN DIFFERENT EUROPEAN COUNTRIES.
THE SLIDES SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. BUT ITS CLEAR THAT IN A VAST MAJORITY OF COUNTRIES IT IS EXPECTED THAT THE DRIVER WILL BEAR SOME OF THE COST, EVEN IF THAT IS SOMETIMES SHARED WITH THE COMPANY.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

29. Is training = working? Qualifying as working hours
This question can be answered in many different ways and represents the main issue negotiated within some Member States. This is often negotiated at company level. However some countries such as Finland and Great Britain, these training are considered as working hours, whilst in other not.
CONCERNING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MEMBER STATES THE LAST POINT I SHOULD HIGHLIGHT IS WHETHER TRAINING IS TREATED AS WORKING TIME.
THIS IS A QUESTION THAT THE TRADE UNIONS ARE VERY KEEN TO KNOW. IN SOME COUNTRIES LIKE FINLAND AND THE UK ALL TRAINING IS COUNTED AS WORKING TIME.
IN OTHER COUNTRIES IT MAY BE PARTIALLY TREATED AS WORKING TIME, OR NOT AT ALL AS DICTATED BY COLLECTIVE OR EVEN SIMPLY INDIVIDUAL WORK PLACE AGREEMENTS.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

30. More information? IRU Academy/CIECA Survey: STARTS’ project:
STARTS’ project:
SO THESE ARE THE TYPES QUESTION AND INFORMATION THAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR IN BOTH THE STARTS PROJECT AND THE IRU ACADEMY / CIECA SURVEY.
AS SAID PREVIOUSLY MORE INFORMATION ON BOTH CAN BE FOUND AT THE WEB LINKS THAT ARE PROVIDED ON THIS SLIDE.
ALSO, I SHOULD SAY THAT AS OUR RESEARCH CONTINUES WE WILL BE UPDATING THIS INFORMATION, SO THAT HOPEFULLY WE WILL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE OUR MEMBERS IN DUE COURSE WITH A TRULY COMPREHENSIVE PICTURE OF THE DIRECTIVE AND ITS CHALLENGES.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

31. Professional Road Transport Training Industry Needs
In order to answer to the training development challenges, the industry needs:
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
WELL WHAT YOU SEE ON THIS SLIDE IS WHAT IT ALL BOILS DOWN TO.
So how best to conclude this presentation.
WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO RESPOND TO THE EVER CHANGING THE LEGAL TECHNICAL AND OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE INDUSTRY WITH THE APPROPRIATE FRAMEWORK, CAPACITY AND TEACHING SKILLS.
MOREOVER, WE KNOW THAT IF WE ARE TO HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT ON THE IMAGE OF OUR PROFESSION AND ROAD SAFETY, THEN WE NEED QUALITY TRAINING AND KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER NOT SIMPLY PROVIDING CERTIFICATES TO DRIVERS SO THEY CAN KEEP WORKING WILL BE THE KEY.
THIS WILL ALSO BE ESSENTIAL TO BREAK DOWN THE BARRIERS TO CROSS BORDER EMPLOYMENT MOBILITY FOR DRIVERS THROUGH MUCH NEEDED CONSISTENT AND ASSURED MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF QUALIFICATIONS.
SO THERE ARE PLENTY OF NEEDS, BUT HOW ARE WE GOING TO RESOLVE THEM.
WELL, COLLECTING BEST PRACTICE AND ESTABLISHING A EUROPEAN NETWORK OF QUALITY INSTRUCTORS IS CLEARLY WHAT THE IRU AND IRU ACADEMY IS AIMING AT AND HAS BEEN DOING SO FOR MANY YEARS.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

32. 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
THE BENEFITS AS INDICATED HERE WILL BE VERY SIGNIFICANT.
AND THE MEANS TO ACHIEVE THIS WILL BE BY CONTINUING TO PROVIDE HARMONISED TRAINING VIA RELEVANT TOOLS, ACHIEVING EU RECOGNITION OF CPC DRIVER INSTRUCTOR QUALIFICATIONS AND BEING CLEAR AS AN INDUSTRY THAT WE ARE ONLY INTERESTED IN TRAINING THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF PERFORMANCE ON THE ROAD AND NOT JUST ON PAPER.
IN A WORD WE WILL ONLY REACH THIS GOAL THROUGH COOPERATION AT EUROPEAN LEVEL AND EVEN MORE WIDELY.
(c) IRU Academy 2011

33. WORKING TOGETHER FOR A BETTER FUTURE
SO THERE ARE INDEED FEW MORE APPROPRIATE WAYS TO CONCLUDE THIS PRESENTATION THAN WITH OUR ORGANISATION’S SLOGAN.
WORKING TOGETHER FOR A BETTER FUTURE
THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
(c) IRU Academy 2011