Beyond Compliance. It sounds so innocent. It sounds so good. It’s one of those phrases like “apple pie” that just seems nice when you hear it. If compliance is good, beyond compliance must be terrific.
Yet the actual phrase “beyond compliance” is being used in a way that is, simply put, inaccurate.
I’m referring, of course, to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s proposal to allow carriers to add certain technology to their trucks and, as a result, have their safety scores improve.
I’m a language guy, and the use of language here flat out stinks.
I start with “beyond.” The word actually has several related definitions. But in this case, the FMCSA clearly intends this definition:
“Superior to; surpassing; more than; in excess of; over and above.”
The fact is, the types of technologies – and even the safety programs FMCSA says should be attached to them – are already in use. Based on the results from carriers who use ELDs, speed limiters and other new truck tech, these do not ensure compliance that is “superior to” or “surpassing” the compliance of others.
Let’s take ELDs as an example.