Cargo Securement - Shipper Responsibility

Shippers’ responsibility within legislation in most jurisdictions including the CVSA OOS criteria has historically been overlooked, even when provincial and/or federal laws in either the United States or Canada allow for the shipper to be charged, this rarely happens. The responsibility of carriers for ensuring that a load complies with all the applicable laws is well understood, but carriers are often confronted with pressure from shippers to transport loads that either have not been loaded correctly or are otherwise not in compliance with cargo securement requirements. An example of this would be when a carrier picks up a load of boxed meat from the shipper and an international deadbolt seal has been placed on the load, and the carrier does not have the authority to break the seal to inspect the load before transporting it, and often the contractual agreements between the Carrier and shipper will not allow the driver to inspect the load prior to it leaving the location. Although it is understood that the carrier should be addressing this problem via contract, carriers are placed in a very awkward position in attempting to stay legal. Another example in the oil and gas industry are situations where a carrier is asked to transport materials from a field location (typically and oil or gas well) to another field location and under pressure from the shipper to move the materials regardless of cargo securement requirements or weights and dimensions rules. (See link below to a Safety Alert issued in 2017 by Energy Safety Canada with photographs of rig/access mats being transported covered with mud and other debris) http://www.enform.ca/files/safety-alerts/Safety%20Alert%20-%2011.2017%20-%20Final.pdf In order to hold the shipper jointly responsible under the principle of vicarious liability, the following conditions have to be established to the satisfaction of a court: that the shipper (or person representing the shipper) 1. carried out a “related function” in respect of that commercial vehicle, and 2. the non-compliance occurred with the shippers consent, expressed or implied.

Holding all persons responsible for violations and in some cases even more the shipper, depending on the situation, is extremely important if we truly want to impact and improve highway safety to the next level. Currently when we look holistically at all of the various laws in place within the transportation industry as well as the CVSA guidance material, highway safety has affectively been covered off in a very systematic fashion to ensure that people and goods are transported in a safe manner. Carriers are being held responsible at roadside for most violations relating to unsafe cargo conditions, but, in cases where the shipper can be held jointly (vicariously) responsible for the unsafe condition, we are not seeing the shipper being held accountable.

The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance “aims to achieve uniformity, compatibility and reciprocity of commercial motor vehicle inspections and enforcement by certified inspectors dedicated to driver and vehicle safety.” In our view, CVSA has the responsibility to improve driver and vehicle safety and we are requesting that a working group be struck possibly as a standalone group or under the vehicle committee to look at how can highway safety be improved by holding shippers jointly (vicariously) responsible where the two conditions noted above can be proved to the satisfaction of a court. NOTE this is a joint submission with; Andrew Barnes Director, Compliance and Regulatory Affairs A/Director, Partners in Compliance www.picalberta.ca Alberta Motor Transport Association 121, 625 Parsons Road SW Edmonton Alberta T6X 0N9 B: 780.395.6145 (Edmonton) C: 403.988.4122 Email: [email protected]