The new "campaign" for this week is to reduce backing to an average of 12.5 backs per driver per day, to cut down on the distance backed, and to eliminate backing exceptions. These are all worthy goals, but the manner in which Telematics is gathering and interpreting the backing data needs to be addressed. I have always been taught that a backing exception is when you get into the vehicle, start it, and immediately shift into reverse. Apparently, Telematics also defines a backing exception as any instance where you put the vehicle into reverse within 200 ft of wherever the DIAD was when it last completed a stop. This makes a guy like me in an industrial park who backs up to a lot of docks look like a spanked ass on the report, especially if he drives a P-7 with swing out doors; Not only do I back to multiple docks that are close together, but I have to stop 3 feet short of the dock, open the doors, and then back up the rest of the way. This also punishes guys like me who pull pup trailers; the process of hooking, unhooking and installing the stinger in the hitch involves multiple backing exceptions. Also, a guy who backs a pup trailer up to a dock has to back a much longer distance to allow for straightening the trailer out; this is not at all unsafe in an industrial park with docks that are designed for use by semi trucks with 54 foot boxes. Another peeve; we are taught to curb our wheels when parking on a hill, of which my route has many. When facing uphill, this involves turning your wheels toward the street and then backing up a foot or so to allow he front tires to bite the curb. This counts as a "back" even though what I am really doing is following the correct methods to secure the vehicle and prevent a rollaway. I had the most backing exceptions and the second highest total number of backs in my center. I only back when absolutely necessary. It would be nice if Telematics could actually interpret what is happening rather than just spitting out a number.