Editorial: CSA Scoring

Watch TV for just a few minutes and you come across a commercial from an insurance company proclaiming why it is right for you.

Is it not common to hear from a passenger car driver about how they got into an accident that was not their fault, yet they couldn’t get full vehicle replacement coverage or had their rates go up anyway?

The American Transportation Research Institute’s latest study on the Compliance, Safety, Accountability program shows this to be one of several consequences that the trucking industry faces.

The largest takeaway from ATRI’s report is that, when crashes in which carriers clearly were not at fault are removed, a significant improvement in key CSA scores is the result.

From the beginning of the federal government’s CSA program, the overwhelming majority of trucking has supported the idea of giving the public a way to compare one carrier against another.

However, industry leaders have been quick to point out what they consider to be flaws in the system that can give customers inaccurate information and place significant financial burdens on individual carriers.

ATRI’s research looked at removing crashes such as those caused by animals or other vehicles hitting legally parked trucks. These are examples of accidents where fault clearly can be determined — not more difficult “he said, she said” cases.

Much like that upset passenger car driver in the TV commercial, it does seem fair for a carrier to ask that it not be penalized for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

ATRI’s report is particularly noteworthy because of how clearly it shows the full costs of including these nonpreventable crashes in CSA scores. In fact, the total expense of these incidents to the 15 carriers included in the study is estimated at $68 million.

Steeper legal consequences, lost productivity from more frequent inspections and higher insurance costs were among the specifics also cited in ATRI’s report.

And that is above and beyond what is often considered the biggest potential risk — losing shipper customers that turn to other fleets because they perceive one to be less safe because of its scores.

“Ultimately, the goal of the CSA program should be to identify those fleets most likely to cause crashes —not those more likely to be involved in crashes due to exposure issues like driving in urban areas,” said Rob Abbott, vice president of safety policy for American Trucking Associations.

We think that is something the people in the TV commercials would agree with, too.