The bottom line here is that the company is trying to reduce/eliminate it's liability for company vehicle accidents. That's just not gonna happen. You can put governors, GPS or a supervisor in the truck, if there is an accident, you will be sued. Accident + 'rich' company + scumsucking lawyer = -$$$$$$$.

The governor helps on the highway with max speed but does nothing for driving 65 in a schoolzone or residential area.
GPS requires constant monitoring and does nothing to stop speeding at that particular time.

Of the two the GPS has the advantage of keepinga constant eye on employees. A plus in the courtroom.

Fritz

 

Welcome to the 'Twilight Zone'!!

 

First of all, I think you have a good idea. I would recomend a speed of 70-75 because it is "Reasonable" and it is based on the top speed limits in most areas. In my opinion, there is no way going 80+ ( just because everyone else is doing it ) is going to make your trucks safer. That to me is as silly of an argument as "why did you jump off the roof"...

I would also put some of those little "how is my driving + 1800---" signs on the trucks. People do call and complain about idiot drivers. Two or three complaints and they are history.

However, I must say that based on the responces here, the question you asked obviously runs contrary to the mentality of most people who visit this site. They want more hp and more speed, not less and anyone who thinks otherwise must be a liberal. As if only a liberal could think that limiting the speed of a fleet was a good idea. You would have thought by their responces that you were trying to limit the speed of their personal truck.

I can think of a few conservative thinking reasons to limit the speed of a fleet:

1) Save money on Fuel cost. Slower = less fuel burned period....( The stuff is not getting any cheaper ).

2) Save money on insurance rates. Should be obvious to anyone...

3) Reduce the possibilities of accidents that cost you more than just higher insurance rates. Accidents also cost you:

A) Lost productivity due to injurues.
B) Lost productivity due to time required to repair/replace equipemnt.
C) Direct loss due to deductables.
D) Higher Medical Insurance rates ( if there are injuries )
E) Higher Work Comp Rates.
F) More legal costs.
G) More administrative costs and or lost productivity.

P.S. what is the #1 cause of accidents....?

 

Depends on what criteria you set up as a cause: if your choice is between conditions or behavior, then 85% to 90% of accidents are "caused" as a result of behavior. This is DuPont's number, not mine or the government.

 

I agree with the GPS being hellpful to a large degree, but we are also looking hard at a product called DriveCam. Please visit www.drivecam.com.