BT Openreach cyclists stay back

[Graham]

The evolution of the motor vehicle transport culture is :-

The creation of danger to those outside the vehicle.
AND
The forcing of those outside the vehicle to mitigate or avoid the danger created.

[mjr]

I saw that last week on one. I was driving at the time, and ironically, I noticed it partly because of the poor driving of the van's driver..........
I think it is very offensive.

Why is it offensive? I fail to see why I should, as a cyclist, get pissed off about a sign on the back of a van saying "cyclists stay back". Sounds reasonable enough for me to give work vehicles a wide berth. Any vehicles for that matter. Don't artics have similar signs?

There are at least two major reasons why it's offensive:
1. it directly contradicts and attempts to overrule the road laws and Highway Code which don't prohibit cyclists from overtaking - at best, it's an attempt to con people who don't know the law and code and at worst, it's pre-emptive victim-blaming of anyone killed by them;
2. vehicle operators who care would do things like buy new lorries with direct-vision cabs so that their drivers can see enough to drive them safely - but that's too expensive and few of their competitors will do it until forced, so they put a few of these signs on to excuse the crap state of the law that allows these low-visibility vehicles onto most of our roads.

[thirdcrank]

This thread has been going so long that I can't remember if I've made the point that signs of this type tend to reduce the onus on the driver to take responsibility for their own actions.

[Psamathe]

.... signs of this type tend to reduce the onus on the driver to take responsibility for their own actions.

I feel it also reflects badly on the company operating the vehicle (or the one with their logo painted on the side) in that it makes a clear statement that they are not prepared to invest in technology to help the driver see into those blind spots and instead transfer the responsibility for the drivers shortcomings onto the vulnerable road users. Says a lot about the companies using such signs.

And thus all crdit to theCo-op (reason I "re-activated this thread) in that they seem to also be investing in that additional safety/visibility technology

We’ve recently installed new safety features on to 2,500 delivery vehicles including reversing cameras, blind spot cameras and high visibility extended side guards. We also regularly hold sessions with our drivers to increase their awareness of vulnerable road users.

Ian

[Cyril Haearn]

Little. Often. Co-op

I would shop there more often if I could

[drossall]

Why is it offensive? I fail to see why I should, as a cyclist, get pissed off about a sign on the back of a van saying "cyclists stay back". Sounds reasonable enough for me to give work vehicles a wide berth. Any vehicles for that matter. Don't artics have similar signs?

The signs were designed for artics, which can have a particular issue with visibility and the need for space around them. They were never intended for smaller vehicles. As others have said, there's no law against bikes filtering. It needs care, obviously, but the signs are fundamentally promoting an approach that is not recognised in law. The proliferation of them onto, sometimes, Minis and the like reflects an assumption that is not the case.

[Flinders]

I saw that last week on one. I was driving at the time, and ironically, I noticed it partly because of the poor driving of the van's driver..........
I think it is very offensive.

Why is it offensive? I fail to see why I should, as a cyclist, get pissed off about a sign on the back of a van saying "cyclists stay back". Sounds reasonable enough for me to give work vehicles a wide berth. Any vehicles for that matter. Don't artics have similar signs?

Explain to me:
how do I get to and advance start box if I 'stay back'?
how does this sign prevent drivers from overtaking me and left/right hooking me?
how many times are you overtaken/undertaken by a lorry when you are out cycling? what's the difference?

[Psamathe]

.....
how does this sign prevent drivers from overtaking me and left/right hooking me?
....

Year (or two) ago I was infuriated when a builders yard lorry (Travis Perking) overtook and pulled in too soon missing me by inches and showing their "Cyclists Stay Back" notice inches ahead of my front wheel. Brought home to me how crucial drivers are to safety and how stupid signs are little more than insulting PR. Really emphasised how easy it can be for companies to stick a sign on their lorries and decide "they've done their bit contributing to cycle safety" whilst completely missing the real issues.

Ian

[Username]

I saw that last week on one. I was driving at the time, and ironically, I noticed it partly because of the poor driving of the van's driver..........
I think it is very offensive.

Why is it offensive? I fail to see why I should, as a cyclist, get pissed off about a sign on the back of a van saying "cyclists stay back". Sounds reasonable enough for me to give work vehicles a wide berth. Any vehicles for that matter. Don't artics have similar signs?

Explain to me:
how do I get to and advance start box if I 'stay back'?
how does this sign prevent drivers from overtaking me and left/right hooking me?
how many times are you overtaken/undertaken by a lorry when you are out cycling? what's the difference?

1. You don't. As with most situations, use your judgement to decide whether it's safe or practical to get to a start box thing.
2. It doesn't. It's just a sticker with words on it. You're probably thinking of a tank.
3. Absolutely no idea to any of these. Being over or under taken is not typically an issue for me. Undertaking is passing someone on the left. Overtaking is passing someone on the right. Vice versa for right hand drive countries.

[Sb329]

Apologies for the thread resurrection but thought I would point out that following the updated guidance, said company discussed advised that these stickers should be removed from vehicles 3.5t and below a good few years ago.

Thankfully mine never had one as I'd have removed it, but it was subsequently decorated when the Awesome stickers came out, I've got through several now as they fade

Got a different van last year and ashamed to admit it took me a week before I realised it had an old fashioned STAY BACK on it... quickly replaced!!!

I hope it raises the odd smile as you still don't see many of these.

[mjr]

Bravo to you. Around here, we've only just got the local Openreach drivers to stop blocking pavements and cycleways unnecessarily when working in a hatch.

[Nearholmer]

I saw a van/lorry today that had an illuminate-able "no cycling" type thing on the back, low down near the number plate.

It wasnt lit, and I wasnt sure whether it came on if reverse was engaged, or the driver could switch it on if they thought a cyclist was about to go into their "sweep zone" or what. Anyone know?

To me, signs warning aboyut the danger of getting into the "sweep zone" of artics are legitimate, and the other sign that is a useful reminder is the "if you can't see my mirrors, I can't see you" one, although it probably ought to come with a further warning in teeny text saying "and even if you can, it doesnt mean I've noticed you".

[Airsporter1st]

I can think of a few where I filter on the left: New Bristol Road, Weston-super-Mare; Hills Road, Cambridge; a few in London.

New Bristol Road lanes are too narrow but almost no-one stops to drop off there and not much turns at the Station Road lights (the other junctions are awkward so people drive a bit more carefully anyway). Meanwhile the mixed traffic lane is also narrow (so little space to filter on right) and if you waited in line, you'd be at more risk of getting crushed in the far-too-common nose-tail shunts of holiday traffic trying to be cute and find a shortcut to/from the motorway than you are from the cycle lane hazards.

In the cities, I'm generally paranoid and fairly noisy if I suspect a driver is about to do something silly that will affect me, whereas the cycle lanes are wider than most and it really does help cut through the queues. Even so, I'm very cautious about using the northbound one on Hills Road bridge over the railway if I want to turn right into Brooklands because it could get messy if the lights change at the wrong moment. I think I move right across the mixed traffic lane a few vehicles before the front of the queue.

So I've no ideological opposition to them, but I won't usually ride in narrow rubbish lanes that are far too common in this country. For example, I won't ride in the narrow nasties at Austin Street, King's Lynn. Vorpal's list of drawbacks is almost a checklist for every highways designer to test if they're building dangerous rubbish.

I think the police vehicle, sans blue lights, going straight on at a left turn only lane, nicely sums up all that’s wrong with road use these days!

[mjr]

I think the police vehicle, sans blue lights, going straight on at a left turn only lane, nicely sums up all that’s wrong with road use these days!

Beware camera foreshortening. The left side road is a good 4ish car lengths in front of the stop line at that junction, so the police vehicle may simply have not reached the corner yet when photographed.

[thirdcrank]

Bearing in mind that that image seems to date from 2014 and the link doesn't seem to include any contemporaneous comment about the circumstances, I'm at a bit of a loss to see what it contributes now, especially in the context of "stay back". . I could well imagine that the driver of the police car had gone down the dedicated left-turn lane and then continued straight ahead. Perhaps the toast was burning, or more likely IME, the driver was trying to get to some pressing incident. I note that in spite of the green traffic light, the peloton before the junction all seem to have their toes/feet down. Perhaps something has happened in front of them. IMO, the main point is that without explanation from somebody who was there, a single image isn't necessarily a good guide to an event.

There's no more law-abiding driver than me, but there are times when a bit of improvisation is necessary. It's not me in that image but in other circumstances it might have been.