Perhaps we should focus on the delivery/pickup sites, Crossrail prohibit trucks that do not meet certain requirements (including spare lightbulbs so that all lights are in working order)... maybe all building sites and shops in London can only get vehicles through to them if they take responsibility for the vehicles by checking paperwork regularly.
Basically... this is fucked up, but it needn't be as others in the supply chain that give these vehicles and drivers business could pretty easily deal with it.
This is the one of the best ways to deal with it. I work on another large rail project with multiple sites and the culture is the same as it is on Crossrail. If a drivers paperwork isn't correct the vehicle isn't booked into a delivery schedule (that's planned properly) and the vehicle doesn't meet the projects standards (again similar to crossrails and encompassing TFLs) The vehicle isn't allowed onto site and can't make it's delivery.
On projects where work can only be carried out in tight time frames (possessions in rail speak) 'just in time' deliveries are the norm. If a contractor jepodises a possession by attempting to deliver something in a non compliant vehicle or with dodgy/incomplete documents, they know they are risking their contracts and a hefty bill for the lost time.
This has happened on this project as the PM's realise that; peoples lives are potentially put at risk by these wagons, they can't risk the delay to the program and (sadly) the risk of bad publicity to the program. This may sound too business like and heartless considering what many cyclists face every day on the roads, but if something is spelled out in a contract with a sub contractor, and is enforced on the ground, it makes a huge difference to the contractors mindset and compliance.
As with all large infrastructure projects this has been cultural change that has been pushed up the management chain by concerned individuals, recognised and adopted at a higher level and then pushed back down and into the contracts. Now the bloke in the yard knows he can turn a wagon away and not be sacked for it as 'we just need to get the job done'.
It's not perfect by any means, but hopefully it helps keep some of these very dangerous wagons and drivers off of the road.
This is the one of the best ways to deal with it. I work on another large rail project with multiple sites and the culture is the same as it is on Crossrail. If a drivers paperwork isn't correct the vehicle isn't booked into a delivery schedule (that's planned properly) and the vehicle doesn't meet the projects standards (again similar to crossrails and encompassing TFLs) The vehicle isn't allowed onto site and can't make it's delivery.
On projects where work can only be carried out in tight time frames (possessions in rail speak) 'just in time' deliveries are the norm. If a contractor jepodises a possession by attempting to deliver something in a non compliant vehicle or with dodgy/incomplete documents, they know they are risking their contracts and a hefty bill for the lost time.
This has happened on this project as the PM's realise that; peoples lives are potentially put at risk by these wagons, they can't risk the delay to the program and (sadly) the risk of bad publicity to the program. This may sound too business like and heartless considering what many cyclists face every day on the roads, but if something is spelled out in a contract with a sub contractor, and is enforced on the ground, it makes a huge difference to the contractors mindset and compliance.
As with all large infrastructure projects this has been cultural change that has been pushed up the management chain by concerned individuals, recognised and adopted at a higher level and then pushed back down and into the contracts. Now the bloke in the yard knows he can turn a wagon away and not be sacked for it as 'we just need to get the job done'.
It's not perfect by any means, but hopefully it helps keep some of these very dangerous wagons and drivers off of the road.
I hope justice is done in this tragic case.