Hit the old Google machine and look up any number of cases of a driver who got into a fatal wreck who was running false logs.

A paper log records nothing. A driver enters information on it.

Funny that you used the same exact words earlier.

Not entirely. A log is fairly easy to falsify, as long as all time stamped documents match up to the log. Anything that isn't time stamped is fair game to falsify. An EOBR would reduce the ability to falsify items.


The current log system does not record when a driver is sleeping or resting either. It only records whatever the driver puts on it. And besides, there's no FMCSA regulation stating a driver must sleep (or that they MUST record sleeper berth time ever, for that matter). I could run 11 hours, then take a 10 hour off duty period in which I get zero sleep, and I've met the requirements of the FMCSA regulations.

I'd love to hear your reasoning for this statement.

What's to say that you will? I don't think you have any basis for this claim.

That's a loaded question. Show me that the idea here holds no water and I'll be happy to answer.

Unlikely.

Or they see that the gubberment is tightening up enforcement on the regulations, and as such they are in favor of any tool there is that will shift the responsibility away from them and put it on the driver.

That would also include all opposition to the EOBR's, right?

 

You made the claim, you back it up. Prove that it will be effective for compliance and that it will cause rates to rise. I was under the impression you already had something, my mistake. I haven't read anything that proves your claim. I need something more than a few accidents one can find on a "Google search". I also would assume there were truck accidents where the driver was in compliance, and still had an accident. Actual unbiased and accurate hard data please.





You kind of lost me here at what you're getting at so I re-quoted myself and I'll explain it a little better than I did. The point I was getting at was without an inspection the EOBR is useless as are log books. If the number of inspections remains the same as it is now we've accomplished little, but we've spent a lot of money doing it, and it makes some people feel good.

The reason I think that way is that last month I got pulled in VA (Roanoke scale) for a paperwork inspection. (Passed) Very nice DOT guy btw, and so we got to talking, he was telling me how easy it is to catch false logs and that a lot of drivers just aren't clever enough to pull it off.

I'll grant you that a lot are, however if these guys are that dumb, I don't think an EOBR will make that much of a difference.

I wouldn't know, sounds like you do. :lol: (I'm kidding you)



My reasoning is sort of in your statement above, EOBR can't prove you were sleeping either. But, let's say a driver drives three hours pulls up to receiver has to wait three hours, does a driver unload (logs half hour) actually takes two. His truck has been shutoff for five hours. Company tells him to wait five more hours and then go to next pick up. The driver isn't tired though and can't sleep. A little extreme but you get the point .

But neither do you.


I'll rephrase. Do you want the government to tell you how to spend your money?



It's very likely.



Could be, but it will still reflect on the company.

Yes very much so, the government is going to try to force me to spend my money on something I'm skeptical of. What's next Rev? That's a scary thought too.

I gotta say I'm a little surprised at your position on this, I'm wondering if you're just playing devils advocate here. I thought you'd be more of a skeptic on something like this.

 

The Rev's performance here is really quite disappointing. The fact that he is just arguing for the sake of arguing is really shining through on this thread way more than usual.This is one of the weakest perfromances I have seen by the great obstinate one.It's like he is not even trying to be convincing this time. :thumbsdown:

 

reminds me of this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM

 

I read somewhere that some with the government thinks that they will eventually be able to tap into our onboard computers and check our paperwork without even having to stop us. They just have their computer call our computer and ask for the data.

For me it is a matter of privacy. I hate the idea of big brother invading my life any more than they are currently. Next we will need to account for our bathroom time.

By the way, the ATA (American Trucking Association) is pushing hard for these EOBR's. They think it will push up rates. I am not so sure. I guarantee you that if making money was not involved this would not be an issue. I have no idea what these recorders will cost. I believe a qualcom costs about $3,500. With 3.5-5 million trucks on the highway that is a lot of money.

 

Ummm....You already need to. If you stop to use the bathroom, you need to log this.

 

Well, contrary to chris1's analogy to the change from 10 hours to 11 hours was supposedly going to raise rates (I don't see how it would), if the ability to falisfy logs is removed, then carriers will be more likely to comply with the log rules. If they are complying with the log rules, then they are likely running slower, and therefore hauling less freight. If each carrier hauls less freight, then rates will naturally go up.[/QUOTE]

If you go back to that time it was the 14 hour rule that was going to necessitate the addition of thousands of trucks to haul the same amount of freight. Lower productivity was going to raise the rates.
If the required use by all of EOBR's slow down the movement of freight then shippers will just demand the use of teams and/or relays with no increases in the rate. A non factor to the company's that already have/do this. The ones affected will be those that don't have that capability and those who will not change with the times.

 

Anyone who claimed that was an idiot. Most drivers were already operating within the 14 hour window prior to the HOS change anyway.

 

All the trade publications and large carriers were claiming that. And it was a 15 hour window that could be stopped at any time by off duty.

 

Just curious,do you truly believe the requirement of EOBR's will effect rates?