Citation

Messerschmidt W. Collision 2006; 1(1): 56-67.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2006, Collision Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

One means of protecting Event Data Recorder (EDR) technology from legislation based on popular misconceptions is the development of standardized and equitable organizational policy by those who employ EDR technology. This thesis is advanced by first defining legislative and organizational policy. After defining policy, an overview of the public reaction to EDRs is offered. Based on this reaction, future EDR policy is described as a High Ambiguity - High Conflict scenario, as defined by Richard Matland’s Ambiguity-Conflict Model. The application of this model shows the need for consensus building among the various interest groups involved in transportation safety. It is further argued that creation of consistent and fair organizational policy is a key first step in protecting EDR technology and facilitating consensus among the various interest groups.

After showing the need for written policy guidance, specific recommendations are made to assist administrators in the creation of workable policy and procedure for EDR use. These recommendations emphasize the importance of: 1) training for EDR users; 2) compliance with state and federal rules of evidence; 3) consistency with existing policy; 4) clarity in defining parameters of EDR use in employee discipline; and 5) preventing top-down micro-management of EDR users and technology.

It is proposed that following such recommendations will help protect the technology from restrictive legislation, because it is a crucial element of consensus building and public acceptance. Furthermore, good organizational policy will also help protect agencies that employ EDR technology from negative publicity, legal liability, and adverse evidentiary decisions.