Why you should wear seatbelts!!!!!!

[Brown67]

Just a couple of examples that have happened around UPS over the last few weeks. This was taken from www.denverbrown.com web site.

Another Fatal Accident

We had fatal accident last month in our district when a feeder driver from Trinidad pulled out in front of truck carrying a full load of rocks. The UPS driver was not wearing his seat belt.
This accident comes on the bumper of another accident, this one not in our district, where a package car driver was killed. Again, no seat belt. Now the rumor is going around that the company is going to start terminating anyone caught not wearing their seat belt.
The question for Union people is: How should we react? Should the Union fight for a driver's right to violate the common sense rule of wearing a seat belt? You know, not only does the company have to attend these tragic funerals, but the Union will be attending also. There is nothing more heart wrenching then going to the funeral of co-worker who could have been saved if they had just been wearing a seat belt.
So what would you do if you were a Steward and the company started terminating people who didn't wear their seat belts? Would you go around rattling your sabres and saying that they can't do that? Would you say it's unfair? You know the possible scenario is that you could save someone's job today and they get killed tomorrow.
I think what I would do is I would begin a little campaign of my own to touch base with every driver in my group over the next few weeks and talk to them about seat belts. And then if someone did get fired, I'd argue that it should be reduced to a warning letter and go through the three step disciplinary process.
I think every driver would become a dedicated seat belt user if they knew management was watching them and they could get fired if they didn't start wearing their seat belt. If someone isn't smart enough to change their behavior when facing progressive discipline, then maybe they aren't really smart enough to be a UPS driver at all.

[redsfan]

Just my opinion, but I would think that if the realization that you might be killed isn't enough of a motivating factor to get a driver to wear their seatbelt, then I seriously doubt that threatening to fire them would do the job. Definitely a 3 strikes, you're out plan wouldn't work either.

Just a thought.

[kips41]

Brown

This is the problem that I have with unions. Where does the union have the right to tell a company how to run it's business.

Most companies I know have rules that are first offense terminating if you are found to have broken the rule, two that come to mind are failing to report an accident and unauthorized passenger.

If the company wants failing to wear a seatbelt or talking on the cell phone to be first offense termination then that is their business.

I worked for the non-union LTL company Central Freight Lines in Houston and they had the seatbelt and phone as first offense rules and we never had a driver terminated for it.

WHY: we knew that the company was serious about it and we wore the GD seabelts and did not use the cell phone or nextels while driving.

If some moron is not cabable of following such simple rules then are they safe and looking out for their's and fellow workers safety!!!!

These rules are about safety and as you talked about the fatilities there is no second chances when things go badly wrong and why should the company give a second chance to a rule breaker on safety sensitive issues. You have talked about in the past about how you don't have to take out an unsafe truck right.....it's not a one way street where you get to pick which rules to follow.

[proffit]

i once saw a sign that read, high voltage lines.... do not climb, highvoltage can kill.....

a few yrs later i saw a new sign, high voltage kills, stay off. not only will you be killed but also charged $3000....

supprizingly enough at a local ts i asked a guy about it. apparently people use to be stupid and took no notice to the voltage kills, but they noticed the dollar signs..

a stiff fine like that would most definatly make u wear a belt.

[greg3564]

If someone can't follow a simple rule like not wearing a seatbelt, they should be fired on the first occurence. I can't understand why someone won't wear something that can save their life.

[yoopr]

I got in the habit of wearing seatbelts and it's a automatic thing that I don't even think about.

When I first started driving trucks we had Lap Belts and with the short wheelbases you'd be black and Blue around the waist. :P

[inmate1577]

I got into an accident many years ago when seatbelts were not the law and I went face first into the steering column, not a pleasant way to spend the weekend.

After spending many years in a tow truck, I cant understand why people refuse to wear a seatbelt or a motorcycle helmet for that matter.

But we live in a dumber society and if you want proof...
Look on the restroom walls. We now need little signs to remind you to WASH YOUR HANDS after taking a dump.

[WildK9]

I got in the habit of wearing seatbelts and it's a automatic thing that I don't even think about.

precisely the way to go. :wink:

once upon a time, i was against it, but only because I think we already have too many laws. remember when it first came about? it was an offense that you couldn't be pulled over for. it was a "secondary" offense. then they made it an offense by which you could be pulled over. too many laws. :wink:

now it's more of second nature thing. :wink:

[emerlin]

We're still having this disucssion? IMO, anyone that dies because they didn't wear a seatbelt is just mother nature cleaning up the idiots.

[GMAN]

I have never thought we should legislate behavior, such as wearing seat belts. There have been instances where wearing them has resulted in people getting killed. There have been situations where people have also been killed where the belts might have saved their lives. I just don't think it is the place to put laws on the books about something which should be a personal decision. I think it is more about raising tax revenue than safety, as far as the government and laws are concerned.

[WildK9]

I have never thought we should legislate behavior, such as wearing seat belts. There have been instances where wearing them has resulted in people getting killed. There have been situations where people have also been killed where the belts might have saved their lives. I just don't think it is the place to put laws on the books about something which should be a personal decision. I think it is more about raising tax revenue than safety, as far as the government and laws are concerned.

i agree totally!!!! :wink:

but....just like most people, i just ended up conforming.

[mike3fan]

I have never thought we should legislate behavior, such as wearing seat belts. There have been instances where wearing them has resulted in people getting killed. There have been situations where people have also been killed where the belts might have saved their lives. I just don't think it is the place to put laws on the books about something which should be a personal decision. I think it is more about raising tax revenue than safety, as far as the government and laws are concerned.

I've heard this argument before,I wonder what the percentages are of people that were actually saved from not wearing their seat belts as opposed to those that would've been saved from wearing them.

My guess it would be overwhelming in the latter

[mike3fan]

I also think you have to look at the figures of people who actually survive some of these accidents,what is the cost to us taxpayers as opposed to what we might have to pay if we get caught not wearing them and get fined?

[GMAN]

My argument is not whether we should or should not wear seat belts. It is with the government regulating our behavior and using it to generate tax revenue. It seems more of a revenue generator than for public safety. I have seen accidents where people have walked away from accidents on both sides of this issue. Like I said, my problem is with the government telling me what I should do in my own car or truck. This has nothing to do with harming someone else. If I choose to take a chance on getting hurt or killed, it is or should be my personal business. We have way too much government into our personal lives that they have no business getting involved. This is supposed to be a FREE society. Freedom is about making personal choices. When government regulates those choices, then it is wrong and erodes our basic freedoms.

[geeshock]

I kinda agree with gman but I do believe we need to do something to get ppl to wear seat-belts. Do you think ppl will still wear them if the law isn't around? I don't think so, look at those in states with no helmet laws for bikes, and look at how many ppl actually turn their headlights on in a storm in New England. It's a shame we need mandatory laws to enforce what should be common sense but until ppl attitudes change I'm goina have to vote to keep it law. The only time that seat-belt comes off is when I'm backing or doing a pullthru or something I really need the added mobility, usually at about 5 mph or less

If the UPS driver drove and acted like a professional, this accident would not have happened.

[kips41]

I have never thought we should legislate behavior, such as wearing seat belts. There have been instances where wearing them has resulted in people getting killed. There have been situations where people have also been killed where the belts might have saved their lives. I just don't think it is the place to put laws on the books about something which should be a personal decision. I think it is more about raising tax revenue than safety, as far as the government and laws are concerned.

While some think that choosing to wear a seat belt is a personal decision , it consequences that affect society in general. A guy gets killed who would have not been killed otherwise. Society pays survivor benefits to children under 18, what about someone who does not have insurance and is a vegetable, the state will more than likely pay for long term care.

While some think that the government is meddling in you life, they tend to have to pay the bill when you are screw up too.

[GMAN]

If a guy gets killed from not wearing a seat belt, that is a personal choice he made. The same thing with the guy who chose to wear a seat belt and got killed. Both made a personal decision and suffered the consequences. It is up to each of us to provide our own insurance to take care of our families. It isn't the responsibility of the government. We used to be more independent in this country. It has only been during the last 20 years or so that people have gone from doing for themselves and being ashamed to receive help from the government, to demanding the government take care of all of their needs. I think we have way too much government in our day to day business. If someone dies, it isn't the responsibility of government to take care of their family. That is something each person should be able to do for themselves. Remember, every time government imposes additional rules and regulations against us, it costs all of us a little bit of our freedom and don't forget the financial benefit to the government.

[WildK9]

If a guy gets killed from not wearing a seat belt, that is a personal choice he made. The same thing with the guy who chose to wear a seat belt and got killed. Both made a personal decision and suffered the consequences. It is up to each of us to provide our own insurance to take care of our families. It isn't the responsibility of the government. We used to be more independent in this country. It has only been during the last 20 years or so that people have gone from doing for themselves and being ashamed to receive help from the government, to demanding the government take care of all of their needs. I think we have way too much government in our day to day business. If someone dies, it isn't the responsibility of government to take care of their family. That is something each person should be able to do for themselves. Remember, every time government imposes additional rules and regulations against us, it costs all of us a little bit of our freedom and don't forget the financial benefit to the government.

very well stated, GMAN!!

[KD7MIR]

While some think that choosing to wear a seat belt is a personal decision , it consequences that affect society in general. A guy gets killed who would have not been killed otherwise. Society pays survivor benefits to children under 18, what about someone who does not have insurance and is a vegetable, the state will more than likely pay for long term care.

Its not society who pays the survivor benefits, its the Social security Administration. To qualify for SS benefits, you have to have 40 quarters (10 years) of paying into the system before you are eligible for anything.

While some think that the government is meddling in you life, they tend to have to pay the bill when you are screw up too.

This has nothing to do with wearing your seatbelt or not, but socialism in general.

I don't know if any of you have heard of Walter E. Williams, but he has a syndicated column, and writes about the click it or ticket campaign every year. I urge everyone to read these two columns. He makes a very convincing argument that seatbelt usage is none of the governments business, and takes the logic used to create seatbelt laws to show the next laws that might be created to save us from ourselves.

Each year, obesity claims the lives of 300,000 Americans and adds over $100 billion to health care costs. Should government enforce a 2,000-calorie intake limit per day? There's absolutely no dietary reason to add salt to our meals. Salt can lead to hypertension-induced heart attacks that kill thousands. Should government outlaw salt consumption? Sedentary lifestyles have been shown to lead to shorter and less healthy lives. Should there be government-mandated exercise programs?

The justifications used for "Click It or Ticket" can easily provide the template for government control of our diets and other lifestyle features. Maybe I'm a bit out of touch with today's Americans. With the silence in the face of attacks on Burger King and McDonald's, alleging they cause obesity, maybe Americans are pining for more government control over their lives -- and "Click It Or Ticket" is just softening up the rest of us for what lies ahead in the future.

and...

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, some 43,443 people were killed on the nation's highways in 2005. If Congress were to enact a 10 miles per hour national speed limit, we'd save thousands of lives each year. You say, "Williams, that would be stupid and impractical!" My response to you is: But look at all the lives that would be saved. What you really mean by stupid and impractical is that preventing thousands of highway fatalities is not worth the cost and inconvenience that would result from having to poke along at 10 miles per hour. Of course, calling a 10 miles per hour law stupid and impractical is a more socially acceptable way of saying those saved lives aren't worth it.

http://www.gmu.edu/departments/econo...05/ticket.html
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/econo...06/ticket.html