Many lorry drivers may have wished that politicians might take the trouble to find out for themselves what those legal provisions they argue about really mean in practice. In December 2005, it happened. German MEP Dr Helmut Markov took up an invitation by the magazine Fernfahrer to gain a glimpse of the possible consequences for lorry drivers of some impending EU decisions.

Dr Markov, a member of the reformed communist party PDS from the German state of Brandenburg, and an expert in the fields of transport and economic policy, is the spokesperson for the 42 member-strong left group in the EP which currently brings together 14 political parties from ten countries. The Parliament, together with the Council of Ministers, adopts laws that apply in all EU member states and influence everybody’s everyday life, including that of lorry drivers.

When they finally hit the motorway during a blizzard around lunchtime on Monday, Dr Markov’s first impression is a positive one. He finds himself in a very comfortable lorry with a friendly driver who is not afraid to speak his mind. Ringo Schulz has long years of experience. He is thoughtful and extremely “cab-proud”. Even an MEP has to take his shoes off before he is allowed into the well-kept cab of the 500 hp Volvo.

For years, Schulz used to drive a tanker lorry, covering the whole of Western Europe and the former Eastern bloc, before he started working for his current employers, Thermotrans Syperrek. The company, founded in Potsdam in 1990, today operates 10 lorries (six Volvos and four Dafs). For them, Mr Schulz runs regular scheduled trips to and from Belgium, alternating between one short week with two journeys and a long one with three journeys. Today he’s got bread spread for Zeebrugge in his Schmitz reefer, tomorrow he’ll bring back bananas from the port of Antwerp for Dresden. The small detour via Brussels is in the interest of a good cause.

Only profits matter

Throughout the nine-hour journey the two men in the cab are engaged in an intense discussion,interrupted only when they stop at a Bratwurst (German sausage) stand in Lauenau. Dr Markov explains in detail how decisions are made within the EU and his outrage at the intense lobbying activities by the “Big Four” integrator companies operating in Europe, who were trying to secure exemptions from the new driving hour and rest period regulations for their vehicles.

“They are fighting against binding implementation of social provisions, just to increase their profits by a few cents, despite the fact that those rules would apply to everybody in the same way.”

As a passenger, Markov can watch how stationary traffic will spoil the tachograph (record) sheet, and how difficult it has become to find somewhere to park the vehicle for the night. This is a matter he will raise with the European Commission.

He has learned that an uninterrupted rest period of 11 hours is quite enough for a professional driver like Ringo Schulz. Previously there have been suggestions of increasing that period to 12 hours in the revised EU Directive 3820. Of course, the digital tachograph is also a subject of their discussions. Schulz is in favour of it, hoping that it will mean an end to pressure from the employers to manipulate the sheets. “I don’t know anybody who will voluntarily spend 15 to 20 hours behind the wheel because they aren’t able to sleep at night,” he says.

The journey begins with something of an eye-opener for the MEP, who had a decisive role in formulating the directive and argued for the inclusion and enforcement of stand-by periods as well as working hours within the 38-hour week.

Schulz has had to wait five hours for his cargo, now he is starting a full working shift. That is nothing unusual in the European transport sector and it won’t change when the decision has been taken in Brussels, even if Dr Markov finds that his position is confirmed. But right now, he is keeping an open mind.

Legislation gone mad

“We drivers always find ourselves with the short straw, even before the straws have been drawn,” says Mr Schulz. “My colleague is still waiting at the shipper’s ramp because the cargo isn’t ready. He can’t sleep, but he will still have to unload the lorry in Zeebrugge tomorrow morning because the deadline for unloading doesn’t change.

“And that’s where the problem lies. If we miss the deadline twice because we stick to the rules, my boss loses the contract. There’s too much competition from other companies who will do the job, and are usually cheaper.”

This is not a new argument for Markov. “I know there is cut-throat competition in your sector,” he says. “That is why we want to redefine driving hours and rest periods, and that is also why we want to include enforcement of working hours at the company level. But the Council of Ministers is opposed to that.

“Only if we manage to draft the provisions in such a way that they affect everybody equally will there be fair competition, because no one can gain an advantage if the same legal framework conditions apply to everybody, all across European road networks.”

Schulz wholeheartedly agrees. “The fines are too low in Germany. In Belgium the standard is 250 Euros, in France and Spain it can cost you up to 2500 Euros. That means that the employer will stick to the rules. In Germany they pass on the fines to the drivers and if we don’t pay up, sooner or later we will find ourselves without a job.”

“That is legislation gone mad,” Markov replies. “On the European level, they make a law which tells drivers and operators how to behave while at the same time, at the national level, member states aren’t prepared to make rules to govern what happens when people break the rules.

“The Council will not accept it because individual countries, who they will not name, do not want it and therefore there is no majority for it. And that is despite the fact that in the new EU member countries in particular there is not much social legislation and hardly any legal regulation of working hours. That is completely absurd.

“And all we want is to make sure that people like you don’t have to drive until they drop dead.”

Driving hours and rest periods: the compromise Just before midnight on 6 December 2005, the European Parliament and the EU Council of Ministers reached a compromise agreement concerning new driving hours and rest period regulations in commercial goods transport for road vehicles of 3.5 tons and over, to apply from April 2006. Additionally, the 25 member states are required to introduce the digital tachograph by May 2006. The new provisions limit driving hours to a maximum of 56 hours per week or 90 hours during a two-week period. As a rule, the current 11-hour rest period remains unchanged. It is possible to split this into two uninterrupted rest periods of nine and three hours duration respectively. Daily rest periods can be reduced to nine hours three times a week. Inspection levels will be increased to at least two per cent of days worked from 2008, and to three per cent from 2010. Member states will be obliged to conduct at least 15 per cent of inspections at the roadside and 30 per cent on company premises. If violations are found, employers and shippers will be held responsible in future. The MEPs’ demand concerning enforcement of the EU working time directive was emphatically rejected. Equally strong was the Council’s opposition to a common definition of serious violations and harmonised sanctions. The Commission has been asked to negotiate this with the member states, but without any obligations.