Dear Golfhobo, Part 8: THE RESULTS ARE IN!

[RebelDarlin]

Because Golfhobo really is that stubborn you're going to leave the rest of us hanging?

[belpre122]

[golfhobo]

BTW, you were right on one question, and wrong on two. I was dead on with two, and received partial credit on the third.

The way you worded the questions, MY answers would have been..

1. NO

2. YES

3. YES (or no depending on which of the 4 questions within that question)

So, which two did I get wrong?

And how did you get "partial credit" on question one? By citing the correct reg instead of the Migrant Workers one?

[Rev.Vassago]

Because Golfhobo really is that stubborn you're going to leave the rest of us hanging?

Unfortunately, yes. I was attempting to settle this. It's clear from his subtle attacks that he wants to go right back at it. I've invited Mike M, but I have no idea if he will come here, given the obvious attacks that would await him.

[RebelDarlin]

Because Golfhobo really is that stubborn you're going to leave the rest of us hanging?

Unfortunately, yes. I was attempting to settle this. It's clear from his subtle attacks that he wants to go right back at it. I've invited Mike M, but I have no idea if he will come here, given the obvious attacks that would await him.

Unfortunately that is what ALL lawyers do, 'interpret' laws, rules and regulations, and present their argument. The majority of Government Regs are left vague just for that reason, you have to hire a lawyer to figure it out. It's the game. For every 'expert' you find to back you up, the opposing side will find one who says the opposite.

The same Reg, used in the same way can be decided upon differently at various levels of the judicial system. There is no one single answer, everything is 'gray' and subject to interpretaion. That's one of the main reasons I quit Law School, I want, scratch that, NEED everything Black & White. There was that moral thing too, I couldn't 'leave your morals at the door' as instructed. :wink:

[Trukrswyfe]

Because Golfhobo really is that stubborn you're going to leave the rest of us hanging?

Unfortunately, yes. I was attempting to settle this. It's clear from his subtle attacks that he wants to go right back at it. I've invited Mike M, but I have no idea if he will come here, given the obvious attacks that would await him.

Unfortunately that is what ALL lawyers do, 'interpret' laws, rules and regulations, and present their argument. The majority of Government Regs are left vague just for that reason, you have to hire a lawyer to figure it out. It's the game. For every 'expert' you find to back you up, the opposing side will find one who says the opposite.

The same Reg, used in the same way can be decided upon differently at various levels of the judicial system. There is no one single answer, everything is 'gray' and subject to interpretaion. That's one of the main reasons I quit Law School, I want, scratch that, NEED everything Black & White. There was that moral thing too, I couldn't 'leave your morals at the door' as instructed. :wink:

I wish all Lawyers were Jim Carrie in Liar Liar. The world would be a much better place.

I too like things well defined, life is complicated enough.
Lowest common denominator I always say.

[Myth_Buster]

Wow... Quite a discussion; hopefully there will be an agreement so all will be happy:

In regard to On-Duty in a day cab, the regs are perfectly clear with very little interpretation required:

§395.2 Definitions.

On duty time means all time from the time a driver begins to work or is required to be in readiness to work until the time the driver is relieved from work and all responsibility for performing work. On duty time shall include:

(1) All time at a plant, terminal, facility, or other property of a motor carrier or shipper, or on any public property, waiting to be dispatched, unless the driver has been relieved from duty by the motor carrier;

(2) All time inspecting, servicing, or conditioning any commercial motor vehicle at any time;

(3) All driving time as defined in the term driving time;

(4) All time, other than driving time, in or upon any commercial motor vehicle except time spent resting in a sleeper berth;

(5) All time loading or unloading a commercial motor vehicle, supervising, or assisting in the loading or unloading, attending a commercial motor vehicle being loaded or unloaded, remaining in readiness to operate the commercial motor vehicle, or in giving or receiving receipts for shipments loaded or unloaded;

(6) All time repairing, obtaining assistance, or remaining in attendance upon a disabled commercial motor vehicle;

(7) All time spent providing a breath sample or urine specimen, including travel time to and from the collection site, in order to comply with the random, reasonable suspicion, post-accident, or follow-up testing required by part 382 of this subchapter when directed by a motor carrier.

(8) Performing any other work in the capacity, employ, or service of a motor carrier; and

(9) Performing any compensated work for a person who is not a motor carrier.

Number four makes it pretty clear, only time spent in a sleeper berth counts and must be logged as sleeper berth. There is no off-duty time in a CMV.

Question 13: What is the duty status of a co-driver (truck) who is riding seated next to the driver?

Guidance: On-duty (not driving).

§395.1 Scope of the Rules in This Part

Question 24: May time spent in sleeping facilities being transported as cargo (e.g., boats, campers, travel trailers) be recorded as sleeper berth time?

Guidance: No, it cannot be recorded as sleeper berth time.

Question 26: May a driver record sleeper berth time as off-duty time on line one of the record of duty status?

Guidance: No. The driver's record of duty status must accurately reflect the driver's activities.

Alcohol may be transported in a CMV, but you cannot consume alcohol in a CMV:

§392.5 Intoxicating Beverage

Question 3: Does the prohibition against carrying alcoholic beverages in §392.5 apply to a driver who uses a company vehicle, for personal reasons, while off-duty?

Guidance: No. For example, an owner-operator using his/her own vehicle in an off-duty status, or a driver using a company truck or tractor for transportation to a motel, restaurant, or home, would normally be outside the scope of this section.

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regul...fmcsrguide.htm

In regard to the HOS, in the initial HOS rule in 2003 it was mandatory a driver have two hours in the sleeper berth with any eight hour period:

[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 49, Volume 4]
[Revised as of October 1, 2003]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 49CFR395.1]

[Page 1159-1162]

TITLE 49--TRANSPORTATION

CHAPTER III--FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

PART 395--HOURS OF SERVICE OF DRIVERS--Table of Contents

Sec. 395.1 Scope of rules in this part.

(g) Sleeper berths.

(1) General property-carrying commercial motor vehicle. A driver who
is driving a property-carrying commercial motor vehicle that is equipped with a sleeper berth, as defined in Secs. 395.2 and 393.76 of this subchapter, may accumulate the equivalent of 10 consecutive hours of off-duty time by taking a combination of at least 10 consecutive hours off-duty and sleeper berth time; or by taking two periods of rest in the sleeper berth, providing:

(i) Neither rest period is shorter than two hours;

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/c...le-search.html

In 2005 when the HOS rules were revised the second two hour sleeper berth was replaced with either two hours off-duty or two hours in the sleeper berth:

§395.1 Scope of rules in this part.

(g) Sleeper berths.

(g)(1)(ii)(A) The term “equivalent of at least 10 consecutive hours off duty” means a period of

(1) At least 8 but less than 10 consecutive hours in a sleeper berth, and

(2) A separate period of at least 2 but less than 10 consecutive hours either in the sleeper berth or off duty, or any combination thereof.

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regul...fmcsrguide.htm

For those unimpressed with an entry pay scale of GS-9 perhaps you could do better? The entry level for a GS-2123 is GS-5

http://www.opm.gov/fedclass/gs2123.pdf

But that’s another story….

Be safe.

[Rev.Vassago]

Expect the gates of hell to open when hobo sees this post.

Golfhobo also claims that sleeper berth time and off duty time are the same thing. I say they are not. Who is correct?

Since you're here, let me ask you another one that hobo and I have disagreed on:

In part 395.1, the "Adverse driving exemption" states that it allows for an additional 2 hours to complete a run if certain critera are met. It has been my position that road construction does not fall under this critera, because it can be known to the person dispatching at the time the run began. Furthermore, I am also of the position that temporary road closures within road construction would also not qualify a driver to use this exemption, because if the road construction can be known to the person dispatching, then road closures can be as well.

Golfhobo is of the position opposite mine, that road construction, as well as temporary lane closures, qualify a driver to use the "adverse driving exemption".

Who is right?


Thanks for posting, Mike.


The score stands:

Rev - 2.25 / 3

Hobo - 1 / 3

[golfhobo]

So... let me see if I have this right.

The mysterious Mike M of the fmcsa audit squad is the same forum poster known as Myth_Buster??

I'll have to admit, I haven't read ALL of his prior posts, but I have muddled through a few of them. And I seem to remember quite a few posts aimed at ridiculing him...... none by me, of course, or at least arguing with him.

Why did you need to "invite" someone here who has been here for some time now and posted 104 times?

I'm just asking. I don't want to waste time going through all this again with the wrong guy. So... Mike M is Myth_Buster??

[Rev.Vassago]

So... Mike M is Myth_Buster??

Did you see the part where I called him "Mike"?


He was a regular poster on TruckNet under the name John Q. Public, and came here under a different name. When he first started posting, I believed him to be someone pretending to be John Q., when in fact he was one in the same.


And would you look at that! The answers he provided here are the same ones he provided me! I guess my questions weren't so horribly worded like you claimed them to be after all!

[golfhobo]

So... Mike M is Myth_Buster??

Did you see the part where I called him "Mike"?

Yes. (that's 2 rolling eyes to your one!) That's why I wanted to be sure they were one and the same, and that this was not just Myth_Buster entering the discussion of his own accord. Thanks for clearing that up with your usual insulting manner.

He was a regular poster on TruckNet under the name John Q. Public, and came here under a different name. When he first started posting, I believed him to be someone pretending to be John Q., when in fact he was one in the same.

Okay, yes... fine. I remember references some time ago to John Q, etc. So, may I take it from your explanation that any other post by him on this forum now meets with your complete approval?

And would you look at that! The answers he provided here are the same ones he provided me! I guess my questions weren't so horribly worded like you claimed them to be after all!

I wouldn't be so quick to say that, Rev. You told ME that question 2 was:

Is there any scenario you can think of where it would be legal for a driver to have alcohol which is not part of a manifested shipment in the cab or sleeper of a CMV?

His answer, which agrees with mine (and I think yours) was yes. So, let's see that gives me 1 point for question 2 and 1 point for question 1.

However, I don't think that's the question you WANTED to ask him, or your contention with what you THINK I have said in the past, so the results were not what you were after, and your "tally" isn't accurate.

And, I would STILL like to know how you got .25 points of extra credit. What? From some understanding of the OLD "new" rules instead of the current ones? Wasn't this what I was saying in my post about other drivers not being able to let go of the old rules and grasp the new ones?

Besides.... Our disagreement on S/B rules had nothing to do with the old rule that the 2 hour break had to be in the sleeper. You said that if you took a full 10 hour break following an 8 hr S/B break it caused a violation. I'm sure Mike's answer to that would be no, never, ever, ever, never under any set of rules. So give up this claim of extra credit... will ya?

So, the way I figure it, through questions one and 2, you have one point and I have two. So, it all comes down to question 3 which is a myriad of questions and contradictions, but I will clear that up with him. I've discussed it enough with you.

[Rev.Vassago]

And would you look at that! The answers he provided here are the same ones he provided me! I guess my questions weren't so horribly worded like you claimed them to be after all!

I wouldn't be so quick to say that, Rev. You told ME that question 2 was:

Is there any scenario you can think of where it would be legal for a driver to have alcohol which is not part of a manifested shipment in the cab or sleeper of a CMV?

His answer, which agrees with mine (and I think yours) was yes. So, let's see that gives me 1 point for question 2 and 1 point for question 1.

Sorry, but you're wrong. As I clearly stated earlier, question 2 and question 3 were presented as one question, and I split it apart as best I could because there were two subjects. He very clearly stated that the only time alcohol was allowed in a CMV was when it was being used for personal conveyance or part of a manifested shipment, which contradicts what you were claiming and supports what I've been saying all along - that the only time you can have alcohol in a CMV is when it is part of a manifested shipment, or when you are using the vehicle for personal conveyance. You attempted to claim that the "on duty" rules did not apply because the driver was supposedly ROD. Sure, you decided to change your mind after everyone started ragging on you for it, but that doesn't change the fact that you were wrong.

For crying out loud, how many posts did you make blathering on and on about drinking a 6 pack in the sleeper during a 34 hour reset? How much did you argue that even if you were drinking in the truck and you went up into the front seat for a smoke, you were still "off duty", because "off duty" and "sleeper berth" were the exact same thing?

And, I would STILL like to know how you got .25 points of extra credit. What? From some understanding of the OLD "new" rules instead of the current ones? Wasn't this what I was saying in my post about other drivers not being able to let go of the old rules and grasp the new ones?

Because I had presented the question to Trooper Dial, who inadvertently quoted the old regulation in regards to it. Mike and I had a discussion regarding this when I had originally posed the questions to him, which I'm sure he can attest to. That is likely the reason he even mentioned it here.

Besides.... Our disagreement on S/B rules had nothing to do with the old rule that the 2 hour break had to be in the sleeper. You said that if you took a full 10 hour break following an 8 hr S/B break it caused a violation. I'm sure Mike's answer to that would be no, never, ever, ever, never under any set of rules. So give up this claim of extra credit... will ya?

Once again, you are wrong. The regulations he quoted clearly state that the 8 hour must have a corresponding 2 hour with it, or it does not meet the requirements for stopping the 14 hour clock. That is the way the old rules were set forth, and that is the way it was presented to me by Trooper Dial, who got it wrong. So I was correct in quoting the regulation as it was told to me, which is clearly worth 1/4 point. But if it makes you happy, I'll give that 1/4 point to Double L.

But since you are trying to play with fuzzy math by giving yourself credit for things you clearly got wrong, I'm taking a half point away from you and giving it to Double L also.

[golfhobo]

Rev said:

So here we stand: at odds with each other on three different subjects -

alcohol in a CMV,

the ability to be off duty in the cab of a CMV, and

whether or not an 8 hour break that is not combined with an additional 2 hour break puts a driver in violation.

Although they are out of order now, you asked in question 2 if there were any scenaria where alcohol is allowed in a cmv other than on the manifest. He and I both said yes.

Off duty in the cab is obviously still under discussion. You may now be excused from that discussion.

But, on the HOS question things are still somewhat screwed up. I believe your original contention, and your question concerned whether an 8 hour S/B break MUST have a corresponding break of more than 2 and less than 10 or it would be considered ON THE CLOCK and a violation would occur EVEN if one took a break of 10 hours or more following it.

Even under the OLD rules, this would NOT be true. I don't care about how Trooper Dial explained it, or what version of the rules he quoted. The question had nothing to do with BOTH breaks being in the sleeper. So, now you've apparently confused Mike to the point HE is answering the wrong question by quoting the old regs.

Even under the old regs..... an 8 hour S/B break would STILL be off the clock for the purpose of calculation of the end of the 14 hour window. And regardless..... if a driver choses to follow that break with a FULL 10 hour break, it resets the clocks with NO VIOLATION.

Now, have him read THIS post and see if he disagrees with me under ANY revision of the rules.

You get no extra credit. Double L gets it! :wink:

[StevenD]

What is the point?! I just spent time reading through these posts and see nothing to solidify the fact that: 1. The HOS rules are seriously flawed regarding expansive and varied trucking occupations, 2. that the FMCSA and representatives can only respond with what is written, and 3. the only way to challenge the HOS would be for the individual driver to go to court for an expensive and possibly extended lawsuit.

Please forgo the intellectual posturing and get to the point. It seems as if (Rev.) is expressing the rule of law and how it must be followed at all cost, the other (Hobo) that the rules are seriously flawed. Am I right?

Steve

[Scoe]

What is the point?! I just spent time reading through these posts and see nothing to solidify the fact that: 1. The HOS rules are seriously flawed regarding expansive and varied trucking occupations, 2. that the FMCSA and representatives can only respond with what is written, and 3. the only way to challenge the HOS would be for the individual driver to go to court for an expensive and possibly extended lawsuit.

Please forgo the intellectual posturing and get to the point. It seems as if (Rev.) is expressing the rule of law and how it must be followed at all cost, the other (Hobo) that the rules are seriously flawed. Am I right?

Steve

KNOCK IT OFF RIGHT NOW!!

What do you think this is Mr. StevenD? Do you think you can come into the middle of this thread with reason and well thought out articulation? The nerve of you Mr.

Either you argue incessantly over and over without ever actually rising above petty, constant belittling or you just stay off this thread. :shock:


Sarcasm included

[golfhobo]

StevenD said:

Am I right?

Nope. You'll have to re-read the whole thread over and over until you get it right!

[Rev.Vassago]

Off duty in the cab is obviously still under discussion. You may now be excused from that discussion.

From what he said:

In regard to On-Duty in a day cab, the regs are perfectly clear with very little interpretation required:

So nope. Wrong answer. You lose. Off duty inside a CMV is impossible. It's either Sleeper Berth or On Duty. Thanks for playing.

I believe your original contention, and your question concerned whether an 8 hour S/B break MUST have a corresponding break of more than 2 and less than 10 or it would be considered ON THE CLOCK and a violation would occur EVEN if one took a break of 10 hours or more following it.

Yes, of course.

Even under the OLD rules, this would NOT be true. I don't care about how Trooper Dial explained it, or what version of the rules he quoted. The question had nothing to do with BOTH breaks being in the sleeper. So, now you've apparently confused Mike to the point HE is answering the wrong question by quoting the old regs.

Did you even read what he wrote?

In regard to the HOS, in the initial HOS rule in 2003 it was mandatory a driver have two hours in the sleeper berth with any eight hour period....................In 2005 when the HOS rules were revised the second two hour sleeper berth was replaced with either two hours off-duty or two hours in the sleeper berth:

Although I find it funny that you are even arguing the one question you actually got right.

Even under the old regs..... an 8 hour S/B break would STILL be off the clock for the purpose of calculation of the end of the 14 hour window. And regardless..... if a driver choses to follow that break with a FULL 10 hour break, it resets the clocks with NO VIOLATION.

Nope. Read it again. And again, if you have to. Until you get it.

Now, have him read THIS post and see if he disagrees with me under ANY revision of the rules.

Should have left it alone. By the time you are done, you'll be in the negative points!

[golfhobo]

From the FMCSA website (without the pictures of the logsheets cuz I can't copy them here.)

I tried to point you here several days ago. This example EXACTLY reproduces your scenario, where no 2 hour break was taken. Note there is NO 14 hour violation, and the 8 hours is still off the clock.

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regul...#_Toc201555007

Logging Example #8


Violations: There is an 11-hour rule violation from 5:00 a.m. – 6:00 a.m. on Day 2.

Explanation — 11-Hour Limit: After 10 hours off, the driver had 11 hours of driving time available at 10:00 a.m. (CP#1) on Day 1. At the end of the day, the driver had 2 hours remaining and, without a valid 10-hour break, the driver violated the 11-hour limit by driving an additional 1 hour, at 5 a.m. on Day 2.

NOTE: The driver had 8 consecutive hours in the sleeper berth, but that break does not give the driver any extra driving time (that is, it does not change the calculation point). In addition, the driver cannot use the sleeper-berth provision because he or she did not obtain the equivalent of 10 hours of rest by getting a combination of at least 8 (but less than 10) consecutive hours in a sleeper berth and another break of at least 2 (but less than 10) consecutive hours.

Explanation — 14-Hour Limit: Calculation of the 14-hour limit begins at 10:00 a.m. on Day 1 (CP#1). The driver used 9 of 14 hours on Day 1. Because the driver then got at least 8 consecutive hours in a sleeper berth, that rest break is not included in the 14-hour calculation. The 14-hour calculation continues into Day 2, and at 6:00 a.m. the driver has accumulated 12 hours and has not driven a CMV past the 14-hour duty limit.

NOTE: The driver had 8 consecutive hours in the sleeper berth, but that does not change the 14-hour calculation point because the driver did not obtain a second break of at least 2 (but less than 10) consecutive hours.

Rev, you are getting hung up on the fact that without the 2 hour break, the driver has not met the requirements of the "equivalent" of 10 hours, and therefore hasn't met the definition of "split logging." But, that doesn't mean the 8 hour break isn't still off the clock. And the situation is immediately remedied, and clocks are reset, if the driver then takes a break of 10 or MORE hours.

[Rev.Vassago]

Rev, you are getting hung up on the fact that without the 2 hour break, the driver has not met the requirements of the "equivalent" of 10 hours, and therefore hasn't met the definition of "split logging." But, that doesn't mean the 8 hour break isn't still off the clock. And the situation is immediately remedied, and clocks are reset, if the driver then takes a break of 10 or MORE hours.

So you are still arguing the only one you got correct, I see......

As Mike M stated very clearly (and even quoted the old reg for reference), under the "Old" rules (2003 rules), the 8 hour had to be combined with a period of more than 2 hours, but less than 10 to qualify, which is where Trooper Dial misinformed me. Under the "New" rules (2005 rules), that provision was eliminated. So there is your one point that you got right, and there is my 1/4 point that I unselfishly gave to Double L. I quoted it correctly, but just under the wrong set of rules.

So that one is completely and utterly put to rest, and we can move on to everything else that you've gotten wrong. :wink:

[golfhobo]

Quick question for Rev or anyone else who was driving under the old, old rules or the old, new rules:

When did the 5 and 5 spleeper option end? i.e: which set of rules allowed that? From what I can tell, it was allowed under the 2003 rules but not under the 2005 rules.