The height under the harbour

The height compliance debate has ramped up.

Many drivers seem to ignore all the height regulation signs, and run right through hanging height indicators, to then wedge themselves in the tunnel.

The NSW government is determined to stop tall vehicles from entering tunnels where they just don’t fit, which causes blockages, delays and disruption.

The fines increase this year, up to $5,500, seems to have done little to stop them either. Licence demerit points and suspensions seem to have limited effect – many are dissuaded, but some trucks are still taking the chance, going in and getting stuck.

The NSW government has just approved $5m to be spent on the Sydney Harbour Tunnel, for indicators up the Warringah Freeway to let drivers know that they are too tall for the tunnel early enough that they can replan their route.

Will this be effective? Or will this end up being just another warning sign that some drivers simply ignore?

The economic problem

The numbers are alarming. On average there is one incident every three days, costing an estimated $55 million to NSW business, causing an understandable knee-jerk reaction by the Sydney Business Chamber, as they called for a complete ban on large performance trucks from the tunnel at all. This issue came to a head this year with three such blockages in two days.

Simon O’Hara, CEO of Road Freight NSW, pointed out the many knock-on detrimental effects of this move, including how it will be detrimental to all good compliant transport companies, possibly in excess of the non-compliant ones.

There are good and compliant transport companies with trucks that are safe to move through the tunnel, but can’t go over the bridge due to weight restrictions. So, these trucks will be taken off the tunnel infrastructure that was built for them, and will be forced into suburban streets that were not, causing havoc of congestion and risk.

On these streets, compliant companies would then have to compete with the same oversized trucks that were the problem in the first place.

So we still have the problem: How to allow trucks to travel the tunnel while disallowing trucks that are over height.

Solutions can be a problem

A new proposal by the NSW government is that trucks which breach height restrictions be de-registered, taking them off the road entirely for six months.

In short: ground non-compliant vehicles. Not just the driver.

What will that do, in the bigger picture?

The major emphasis in the change to the compliance laws in recent years has been to shift responsibility up the chain. Instead of leaving the decisions and the punishment down the chain to the driver, the transport company management is held responsible and is handed the penalty.

In theory this would make them think twice about sending drivers off with timetables that are unreasonable without taking non-compliant short-cuts through the tunnel.

But what measures would deter them? Heavier fines? Driver suspensions?

Mere fines moved away from the driver but waved off by the company could make the situation worse instead of better as the occasional cost borne by the company is easily absorbed.

To suspend the driver might be devastating to the driver, but light on the company who might just fill in with another driver until the first is available again. Meanwhile, the truck itself might still be in use, even hired out by the owner to another driver with even less experience.

The new proposal to de-register the trucks may hurt the company enough to make them reconsider encouraging their drivers through the tunnel. If the truck is out of action, then whoever owns the truck is penalised as they can’t even hire it out to someone else, and companies can’t fill it with another driver. The burden of the penalty hits a bit higher in the chain of responsibility.

But how often do non-compliant trucks get booked? And what happens with that penalty? In this past year, though there have been so many tunnel-blocking incidents, only four bookings have been made, and only three of them stuck.

Sometimes heavier penalties means that fewer penalties actually get applied. With inconsistent and infrequent policing, a few companies appear willing to take that ‘acceptable risk’ and treat a fine like a mere toll.

What are the alternatives?

Rewards for good

What if we operated with both carrot and stick? We need to keep penalties for companies breaking the law, probably, but we can also put in measures to prove that those trucks in your company were absolutely doing the right thing.

If all the companies that could prove that they complied with the height laws all throughout the year were given a hefty bonus (or were reimbursed their fees or taxes), then those companies would have a positive incentive to pay attention to the height laws and stick to them all throughout the year.

This is all possible with available technology and a watchful compliance manager, and with a potential $55 million being saved just in NSW alone, there might be plenty of gold to back up the incentive.

Thus many sides of economics work in favour of safety: The state wins through fewer tunnel-blocking incidents, the companies are positively motivated towards compliance (penalties really don’t work psychologically – ask a teacher) every day instead of just when caught and compliant companies become profitable and competitive against those less ethical.

So let’s apply a little positive psychology and behavioural economics to the situation, and get only the right trucks in the tunnel.

Image source: https://www.triplem.com.au/story/transport-workers-protest-outside-aldi-stores-across-the-country-213793