No charges Humbolt Bus Crash !?!?!?

From what I read the Sidhu wasn't distracted by his cell phone and the implication is that he didn't recognize that he was approaching a stop sign, as opposed to him purposely running it.

So what does that leave, fatigued or simply zoned out. There's no indication has wasn't in compliance with the HOS.

I don't know how you can prevent complacency, unfortunately.

What type of change are you looking for from the government?

 

The Crown did submit that violations in Sidhu's logbook and trip inspection reports constituted an aggravating factor.

- Document shows Humboldt Broncos' driver saw danger of impact but could not stop | CBC News​

It is, and has been, far too easy to get a licence and to start a trucking company and to remain in the industry after being shut down for violations (as is the case in this instance). Some provincial governments have recognized some of the issues, especially since the crash, and are taking steps to rectify them. However, issues like chameleon companies, proxy directors and accountable executives need to be addressed. Despite my loathing of overbearing regulations, I think Transport Canada needs to be involved to greater degree and they need to look at implementing some of the rules from rail and aviation.

 

I attended driving school about 6 years ago. I was absolutely floored when I wrote the written test when I found out that I could literally have pre-booked the road test for that afternoon and had gone home that day with a Class 1.

Growing up around trucks and hanging out in the bush definitely gave me an advantage over the average person in driving school (I mean I knew the basics of shifting, how to throw chains, some knowledge on commercial vehicle regulations, axle weights, etc). They never taught us anything other than how to drive.

 

I missed that one. Curious if we'll get more detail. Nonetheless unless I'm missing something I don't see the blame in this one falling on anyone other than the driver.

If it leads to some needed change that's a good thing but this type of driver error won't be prevented.

 

Ah, I sense confusion. I agree 100% of the blame for the accident is on the truck driver. However, the conditions that allowed him to be in the driver’s seat and the carrier to be in business extend beyond the driver.

I will argue that good, competent instruction and testing could weed out a lot of marginal drivers that are inclined to drive through stop signs.

 

I remember my driving instructor telling me a story while we were driving. He went on and on. Then he told me I did good, apparently he was testing me to see if I would concentrate on what I should be vs. concentrating on his talking.

Unfortunately I don't see any type of credible testing that can determine whether I would be able to maintain concentration for hours on end while alone, driving through rural Saskatchewan. Certainly nothing conclusive enough to deny someone a license when they have shown competence in operating a vehicle.

Perhaps more time could be spent on educating new drivers on how to recognize when their concentration may be starting wane, I don't know. Can technology provide some help, perhaps but that's not the world I want.

As long as I can remember there have been education campaigns to convince people not to drive drunk yet the numbers show little success. Same thing with distracted driving.

I haven't found anything on Sidhu's driving record, though I imagine if he had a history of tickets that would be easily found on google. Nothing to suggest he was inclined to blow stop signs either. Perhaps we'll learn more but it seems he simply f'd up in a manner that too many drivers do every day, with lesser consequences.

Though I disagree with the opinion piece in post 185 that any one of us could easily find ourselves in that situation I do agree that everyone messes up on occasion and many have gotten 'lucky' at some point. I just don't think that missing that many clues is normal 'split second' distraction.

While better instruction and tougher standards would raise the bar I don't see a way to test for the type of error that seems to have occurred in this case. Life can be dangerous.

I don't see any reason he shouldn't have been in the driver seat. As for the company being in business it seems there could be some improvement in that area.

 

Road test instructors in Manitoba had complaints filed against them by companies and drivers, for being too hard and failing people on road tests. They were unofficially told to ease back on “minor fails”. Most refused.

 

There have been proven cases of fraudulent testing in several provinces. Alberta is in the middle of reclaiming the previously-privatized testing function. There is nothing inherently wrong with privatized testing, but there has to be robust oversight by the government... which there was not.

Aptitude can't be taught, but limited aptitude can be overcome with properly taught and practised skills and techniques. Likewise, attitude can be modified by proper instruction. And those that can't drive properly, or shouldn't drive at all can be washed out.

See: aviation.​

 

As the Len Dubois driver did

 

Sentencing begins for semi driver who caused Humboldt Broncos crash | CBC News

University of Saskatchewan law Prof. Sarah Burningham said Cardinal's sentencing decision will have to be based strictly on the facts, despite the international attention the case has attracted.

"It's so unique and so tragic, just the scale of death," Burningham said. "We don't have many cases like that, if any. It makes it a very emotional case."

Burningham said the early guilty plea and a lack of intent to harm could be a factor. The maximum sentence for dangerous driving causing death is 14 years in prison.

She said dangerous driving causing death has typically resulted in jail terms between two and five years in Saskatchewan.

"Our sentences are generally lower for offences that are about carelessly causing injury, and so this will be lower than something you'd see in something obviously a murder," she said.

The sentences for the 29 offences will likely run concurrently — at the same time rather than one after the other — especially since they all resulted from the same action, she said