Balancing road safety, Owners accountability and the protection of workers, particularly those in Ghana's informal Sector.
Ghana's introduction of the TraffiTech-GH automated traffic enforcement system is a major step towards improving road safety and promoting discipline on our roads. However, it raises an important question: When a driver commits a traffic offence while operating an employer-owned vehicle, who should ultimately pay the fine ? the driver/worker or the employer/owner?
This debate goes beyond traffic enforcement. It concerns labour rights, economic justice and accountability, particularly for thousands of Ghanaians working in the informal transport sector.
Ownership versus responsibility
Under the new enforcement arrangement, electronic notices may be issued to registered vehicle owners, including companies, even when their employees were driving at the time of the offence.
However, receiving a traffic notice as the vehicle owner does not automatically determine who should ultimately bear the financial cost within the employment relationship. Legal liability and workplace financial responsibility must be distinguished.
What does the Labour Act say?
The Labour Act, 2003 (Act 651), provides important protection. Section 69(2)(a) prohibits employers from imposing pecuniary penalties on workers, while section 69(2)(b) restricts deductions from workers' remuneration. Section 70 specifies circumstances in which deductions may lawfully be made.
Therefore, employers cannot automatically deduct traffic fines from employees' salaries without considering the applicable legal provisions.
Nevertheless, section 11 requires workers to exercise due care in performing their duties. Drivers must therefore obey traffic regulations and accept responsibility for established misconduct.
The informal sector: A critical concern
The impact may be even greater in the informal sector, where thousands of taxi drivers, trotro operators, delivery riders and commercial drivers work under daily sales targets, commission arrangements, daily vehicle rentals and informal agreements.
Consider a taxi driver who pays a daily rental fee to a vehicle owner. If an electronic fine arrives several days later, should the owner automatically transfer the cost to the driver without establishing who was driving and the circumstances of the offence?
Equally, where an employer fails to maintain a vehicle or pressures a driver to operate under unsafe conditions, responsibility cannot fairly be transferred entirely to the worker.
Informal workers deserve protection too. Their lack of formal employment contracts must not become an opportunity for exploitation.
There should be a balanced accountability
The appropriate Authorities should provide guidelines addressing driver identification, lawful deductions, vehicle maintenance, employer negligence and the realities of informal commercial transport.
Conclusion
A driver who deliberately violates traffic regulations must be accountable. Equally, an employer who neglects vehicle safety or encourages unlawful conduct must accept responsibility.
Road safety must not become an excuse for labour injustice, and workers' rights must not become an excuse for irresponsible driving.
Ghana needs an enforcement system that protects lives, respects workers' remuneration and holds both drivers and vehicle owners accountable according to the law.
Let technology enforce discipline on our roads, but let justice determine who pays the price.
