interesting stats comparison of major companies

[bigpapa7272]

Hey guys i was bored and I was looking at us dot figures for the following companies i've broken it down by what the average miles was for all drivers and what you would make as an new driver starting out on the average miles.

These figures are based on 2003 numbers thats the most current numbers I can find.

I did this for just a comparision, keep inmind the numbers for mileage are not adjusted for practical miles or hhmg miles. Also doesnt count layover pay detention etc etc

Company/ Total Miles by all drivers/ number of cdl drivers at end of year/ average miles per driver per year / average miles per driver per week / average gross pay per week based on newbie pay rate company after being assigned own tractor as a solo driver/

Cr england/ 349,415,471/ 2513 /139,043 / 2673 / $695

Swift/ 1,728,411,440 / 16634 / 103,908 / 1998 / $520

Stevens / 189,453,756 / 1327/ 142,768 / 2745 /$714

Roehl / 159,710,941 / 1489 / 107,260 / 2062 / $619

P.A.M. / 238,256,383/ 2090 / 113,998 / 2192 / $614

USA Truck/ 222,078,682 / 1810 / 122,695 / 2359 / $ 660

Maverick / 90,125,808 / 933 / 96597 / 1857 / $ 631

So whatcha think? I could do this all day but i just did some of the well known names that hire noobs.

[Uturn2001]

I would question some of the data, which I believe is skewed at best, faulty at worst.

The reason I say this is because some companies, like Swift, have a lot more local drivers, percentage and total numbers, than other companies. These drivers are added into the total count and since a local driver typically drives a lot less than a regional or OTR driver does it can and does effect the other numbers being used and therefore skews the data and provides a faulty picture.

[ibamars]

What, no Schneider!!!!

[dle]

If you are using the safer system be very careful.

I have a spreadsheet with that kind of information for a hundred or so carriers. You will quickly discover the data is not very consistent.

The years that mileages are reported are not all the same for all the carriers. The date that count on drivers and tractors aren't the same as when the mileages are reported (they are sometimes more current). You cant accurately compare carrier A to carrier B when they report different source data. Heck you cant even do much with carrier A when that carrier reports mileages from 2003 with counts from 2007 (unless you want to assume that the mileages have changed in 4 years).

[bigpapa7272]

i thought it was interesting that england was second

[Jay B]

Either there is a problem with the data or everyone I have talked to in the last 4 months is a liar.

[Uturn2001]

i thought it was interesting that england was second

Better go back and read what I said.

The data used is faulty.

[bigpapa7272]

how is government data faulty?

[WildK9]

how is government data faulty?

You ARE joking, right? :P

[Uturn2001]

how is government data faulty?

Let me put it another way.

The raw data may be fairly accurate. It is the conclusions drawn from that data that are faulty.

When you look at that data it makes a person think they can or have a better chance at making more at company "A" than at "B".

What the data does not take into consideration are local drivers who drive fewer miles, are paid differently, etc, but are still counted in the total employee count.

A local driver may not even drive 500 miles in a single week, and are usually paid either hourly, salary, or per load.

[bigpapa7272]

i probably shouldnt have put the dollar figure in, but I was more interested in the average miles per week.

my real job at home is getting worse by the day, so im really anxious to get started.

[Uturn2001]

Well I hope that you understand how the data is somewhat faulty.

[Skywalker]

how is government data faulty?

Government data is generally as faulty as it is accurate.

For instance:

Within the fatality reports compiled by the USDOT, the total number of deaths include not only those in "trucks" but all the deaths in vehicles which have a GVWR in excess of 10,001 lbs. Further all deaths which occurred in combination vehicles include deaths in RV's, to include 5th wheels, travel trailers or RV's pulling a trailer or any kind.

These same statistics are used against the trucking industry and mis-portrayed as "deaths in trucks"...."KILLER TRUCKS" also known as CMV's. Statistics generated by civil servants....who may or may not give a damn....are probably the result of darts thrown at a board with numbers on it..... :shock:

[Piece Of Work]

I wouldn't even waste my time compiling 2003 stats.

[dle]

I don't know its sort of interesting compiling statistics using 2003 miles against 2007 counts on drivers and trucks versus fatalities for the last 2 years even if the truck was not directly involved with it.