Every morning, anywhere from a few thousand to tens of thousands of employees board buses contracted by their companies. At large workplaces, the number of commuter buses ranges from dozens to thousands—essentially amounting to running a small bus company. However, commuter buses are often viewed as “operations that run themselves” as long as the outsourcing contract is in place. This is because it’s practically difficult for the General Affairs and HR teams—which already have a heavy workload—to keep a close eye on daily operational safety. Until an accident occurs, everything seems fine.
This article answers one question: Why is driver monitoring necessary for commuter buses?
To state the conclusion first: A significant portion of commuter bus accidents stem not from the vehicle itself but from the driver’s condition; however, under an outsourcing model, the contracting company has no way of observing the driver. Furthermore, the charter bus industry—which actually operates these commuter buses—is facing structural challenges such as a driver shortage and an aging workforce, making it highly likely that risks related to drivers will only increase in the future. The true risk of commuter buses lies at the intersection of these three factors, and driver monitoring is precisely the tool that addresses this gap.
Let’s start with a specific scene.
At 6:40 a.m., Commuter Bus No. 7 pulls away from the bus stop. The driver has been driving this route for four years. Yesterday, after finishing his morning commuter run, he drove a charter service for the company during the day, and his day didn’t end until he completed the evening commuter run. — a typical day for a charter bus driver. And today, he woke up at 4:30 a.m. for the first run. The road is familiar, and most of the 40 or so passengers are asleep.
About 10 minutes after getting on the expressway, the driver’s eyelids grow heavy. He doesn’t even realize it—that’s the nature of drowsiness. The bus drifts slightly out of its lane; a car next to it honks; the driver startles awake and corrects his posture. The bus arrives at the depot as if nothing had happened.
The only person in the world who knows about those five minutes is the driver himself.
—what would have happened? Here’s how the day unfolds for the person in charge of the General Affairs Team.
7:00 a.m.: A call reporting the accident. 8:00 a.m.: News of the accident and photos begin circulating in the company-wide group chat. 9:00 a.m.: Calls start coming in from the families of injured employees, and by mid-morning, local media report it as the “OO Company Commuter Bus Accident.” — Although the accident was caused by the contracted carrier, it is the client company’s name that appears in the headlines. In the afternoon, management issues a report and demands measures to prevent recurrence; if there are seriously injured passengers, an investigation begins to determine whether the incident qualifies as a major industrial accident.
The costs are not merely theoretical. According to accident data from the Chartered Bus Mutual Aid Association regarding commuter bus operations for major domestic corporations (18 transportation companies, 1,077 buses), 2.165 billion won in insurance payoutswere made in the second half of a single year alone. This means that accidents and compensation claims involving commuter buses are already routine costs. On top of this, the costs to the contracting company in terms of reputation, ESG, and internal trust are nearly impossible to quantify.
This article focuses on precisely those “five minutes that no one notices.” First, I will examine why such five-minute intervals are structurally inevitable on commuter buses, and then I will outline three principles for making those five minutes visible in order to reduce accidents.
According to statistics from the National Police Agency’s Traffic Accident Analysis System (TAAS), approximately 98% of traffic accidents are caused not by vehicle defects or road conditions, but by driver factors —such as traffic violations (e.g., running red lights or crossing the center line) and failure to fulfill the duty of safe driving.
Among these, the number one single cause is “failure to fulfill safety obligations” (56.1%). Although the term may be unfamiliar, its meaning is simple: it refers to situations where the driver has not exercised the basic care expected of them—such as monitoring the road ahead and steering and braking accurately—even if they did not violate any specific traffic laws. Typical examples include drowsy driving, failure to watch the road ahead, and using a cell phone while driving. Within this category of failure to fulfill safety obligations, drowsy driving accounts for the largest share (47.8%).
In short, the statistics consistently conclude that the root cause of accidents lies not in the vehicle itself, but in the driver’s condition.
Even in accidents where a “vehicle malfunction” was suspected, the results point in the same direction. Of the approximately 400 traffic accidents investigated by the National Forensic Service over the past five years on suspicion of sudden acceleration, not a single case was confirmed as an actual vehicle defect (sudden acceleration); the majority were determined to be caused by the driver’s incorrect pedal operation. Commuter buses are no exception—in fact, this risk is amplified due to the following conditions.
Commuter buses possess conditions that amplify this risk.
The second risk lies in the outsourcing structure itself. Commuter buses are mostly operated by charter bus companies under contract. While the contracting company receives contracts and monthly reports, the actual conditions of operation remain hidden, as follows.
| What the contracting company wants to know | Current Means of Verification |
|---|---|
| Did the driver doze off early this morning? | None |
| Was the safety training promised by the contractor actually conducted? | Just a certificate of completion |
| Are there any drivers who repeatedly engage in dangerous driving? | None |
| What happened immediately before the accident? | The contractor’s CCTV footage—can only be reviewed after the accident, and only through the contractor |
In short, the client company’s safety management is based on “trusting the contractor.” However, when an accident occurs, it is the client company that faces employee injuries, damage to its corporate image, and the risk of being investigated for a major industrial accident . Responsibility is not delegated.
The third issue concerns recent changes. The chartered bus industry—which actually operates commuter buses—is currently facing both a labor shortage and an aging workforce. Across the transportation industry as a whole, the driver shortage is worsening; skilled drivers have left for delivery and courier jobs and are not returning; and 25.3% ofcommercial drivers are 65 years of age or older.
Contractors under pressure to maintain profitability have few options—rapidly deploying inexperienced drivers, keeping older drivers on the road, and maintaining tight schedules. While it’s difficult to blame any of these issues solely on the contractors, the resulting increase in accident risk is passed directly onto employees’ commutes.
To summarize— the cause of accidents lies with the drivers (①), the contracting companies cannot see those drivers (②), and driver risk is on the rise (③). This is half the answer to the question, “Why driver monitoring now?”
The other half is that driver monitoring precisely fills the three gaps mentioned above.
A Driver Monitoring System uses AI cameras to detect risky behaviors—such as drowsiness, failure to look ahead, or cell phone use—in real time and alerts the driver immediately upon detecting a risk. In the context of commuter buses, this has three key implications.
So, “how” exactly do accidents decrease? There are three principles.
The time between the onset of drowsiness and veering out of a lane is measured in seconds. As soon as the AI camera detects eye closure or head nodding, an audio warningsounds, allowing the driver to correct their condition before an accident occurs. This is the crucial difference from post-incident review (CCTV) — CCTV records accidents, while real-time monitoring prevents them .
The effectiveness of this principle has been verified through a public pilot program. In the Korea Transportation Safety Authority’s bus pilot program (involving 13 transit companies, 500 buses, 1,615 drivers, and a total operating distance of 1,000 km), the introduction of real-time warnings resulted in a 99.7% reduction in drowsy driving (from 1.54 incidents to 0.005 incidents), failure to watch the road ahead by 93.4%, and traffic signal violations by 87.6%.
Accidents do not happen suddenly. As in the scenario above, the same risky behaviors are first repeatedby a specific driver. The way to break this cycle isnot through punishment but by changing habits,and driver scoring is the tool that makes this possible.
Here’s how it works: Detected risky driving behaviors are accumulated for each driver and calculated into a safe driving score. Drivers can check their scores and trends, gaining specific insight into which behaviors are lowering their scores. A vague reminder like “Drive safely” is transformed into specific feedback such as “Your sudden acceleration this month has decreased compared to last month.”
There are two layers to this process that lead to habit formation.
And whether improvement has occurred is confirmed by the following month’s score. Management based not on “training provided” but on “scores improved” —this is the true meaning of breaking the cycle. Even the insurance payouts of around 2.1 billion won per half-year seen in the previous scenario were, to a significant extent, the result of such repeated habits ultimately leading to accidents. The next principle demonstrates exactly how these numbers change when habits are altered.
Based on the AI safe driving solution, the vehicle’s AI camera performs detection and issue warnings, and the monitoring platform displays that data on a screen accessible to both the client company and the contractor. The contracting company can monitor risk trends by route and time of day to hold data-driven safety discussionswith the subcontractor, while the subcontractor can demonstrate its diligent operation through concrete numbers. The subcontracting relationship transforms from one of surveillance to a collaborative partnership based on shared data.
Actual results have already been confirmed. An analysis of data on accident statistics from the Chartered Bus Mutual Aid Association—covering 18 transportation companies and 1,077 buses that implemented this solution on commuter buses for a major domestic corporation—showed that insurance payouts decreased by 68% compared to the same period the previous year(2.165 billion → 692 million won). The implementation process and detailed results are summarized in the case study on the actual implementation of AI safety management for large corporation commuter buses.
| Questions | Answer |
|---|---|
| Why Is It Necessary? | The cause of accidents lies with the drivers (56.1% due to failure to fulfill safety obligations, such as drowsiness), but the companies contracting out these services cannot directly oversee the drivers, and the risk is increasing due to labor shortages and an aging workforce. |
| How to Reduce It | ① Immediate warnings the moment a risk occurs (verified to reduce drowsiness by 99.7%) ② Fostering safe driving habits and providing incentives through a safe driving scoring system ③ A system where the contracting company and the subcontractor view the same data |
| Results | Actual measurements from 1,077 commuter buses — 68% reduction in insurance payouts (data from the Chartered Bus Mutual Aid Association) |
The next steps in commuter bus safety management—how to begin implementation (bidding and contracting), how to evaluate outsourcing companies, and what changes have occurred at companies that have actually adopted the system—will be covered in subsequent articles in the Commuter Bus Series.
Get a Safety Assessment of Your Company’s Commuter Buses
We’ll guide you on what types of risky driving are currently occurring on your commuter buses and what you should check first from the perspective of a contracting company.
A. This is due to three overlapping factors. First, the majority of traffic accidents stem from the driver’s condition, such as drowsiness or failure to pay attention to the road ahead (56.1% due to failure to fulfill safety obligations, of which 47.8% is due to drowsy driving). Second, since commuter buses are operated under contract , the contracting company has no way to monitor the driver’s condition. Third, driver-related risks are on the rise due to labor shortages and an aging workforce in the charter bus industry. Driver monitoring fills these three gaps by detecting and alerting to risks in real time, and by providing the contracting company with data to verify the actual situation.
A. It reduces accidents through three principles. ① Immediate intervention — As soon as the AI camera detects drowsiness or failure to look ahead, it sends a voice warning to the driver to correct their behavior before an accident occurs (verified to reduce drowsy driving by 99.7% in a pilot project by the Korea Transportation Safety Authority). ② Habit change — Each driver’s safe driving score is accumulated, leading to specific feedback, recognition, and encouragement, which helps safe driving become a habit. ③ Structural improvements — Detection data is transmitted to a monitoring platform, allowing the contracting company and the service provider to review the same data and discuss safety measures.
A. CCTV is a tool for reviewing footage after an accident, while driver monitoring is a tool for detecting risks and issuing warnings before an accident occurs. Additionally, since CCTV footage is stored by the contractor, it cannot be used by the contracting company to assess day-to-day safety conditions. The two are not substitutes for one another; they serve distinct roles: prevention and documentation.
A. There are two key areas: the contract and data. During the contracting phase, the contract should explicitly stipulate the use of safety management solutions and data sharing. During the operational phase, the contracting company can use a monitoring platform to track risk trends by route and time of day, enabling data-driven safety discussions with the contractor. The article on evaluation criteria for commuter bus contractors discusses in detail how to incorporate safety data into the selection and evaluation of contractors.
A. A reduction in accidents leads to lower insurance payouts. Based on actual data, an analysis of 1,077 buses operated by 18 transportation companies—which were introduced to the commuter bus fleets of major domestic corporations—using accident data from the Chartered Bus Mutual Aid Association revealed that insurance payouts decreased by 68% compared to the same period the previous year(from 2.165 billion won to 692 million won). However, since the calculation of contribution shares and insurance premiums varies depending on the terms of the contract between the association and the insurance company, a decrease in payouts does not directly guarantee a reduction in premiums; rather, it serves as a favorable basis for renewal and negotiation.
A. It depends on how the system is operated. If it is designed as a tool for protection rather than detection, acceptance will be higher—risk warnings help drivers prevent their own accidents, and accumulated safe-driving data serves as a basis for adjusting unreasonable dispatch schedules and as evidence of a driver’s diligence in the event of accidents or complaints. The system took root quickly in workplaces where a points-based feedback and reward system was implemented together.
The statistics in this article are based on the results of data analyses from the National Police Agency’s Traffic Accident Analysis System (TAAS), the Korea Expressway Corporation, pilot projects by the Korea Transportation Safety Authority, and accident status data from the National Charter Bus Mutual Aid Association. The effectiveness of implementation may vary depending on the operational environment.