split sleeper berth and independents
 

I thought I might have better luck in this section.

Are there any independents here who would like to see the feds restore the split sleeper berth provision to HOS regulations?



stonefly

yes I would

One thing I have learned is you have to know when to pick your battles and when to adjust. I have read the whole discussion on the other thread and personally it really isn't that big of a deal to me, I can run as much as I want and I can get enough rest to do my days work so this battle seems a bit useless to me.

When under the "old" HOS I hardly ever used the split sleeper berth and really don't feel that it is all that helpful for me. I actually use the split sleeper option under the current rules more than I ever used them under the old one.

If the power of OOIDA isn't getting things changed with their lobbying in D.C. then it becomes apparent that this a losing battle, of course this is just my opinion.

A couple of other truckers and I collected a lot of comments from the feds' web site. I believe the comments count for a lot. They were submitted 2 1/2 years after the split sleeper berth provision was taken from us. After 2 1/2 years of living with the mess, drivers made their comments at their first opportunity to do so. Nobody can realistically claim that their comments are a "knee jerk" reaction.

There never was a significant, specific, comment period offered for the split sleeper berth provision. The comment period for the 2003 rule changes should not be considered, because the removal of the split sleeper berth provision was only one of many possible considerations for inclusion in the new rules.

The comments we collected were the ones that protested the loss of split time. The comment period was actually designated by the feds for consideration of the 11th hour driving and the 34 hour restart provisions. The last time I looked, there were 3,500 comments.

In early 2008, we collected the comments that begged relief from our loss of split time. We didn't get them all, frankly because it was a lot of work. We read every comment. There were over 3,000 at the time. We have, I believe, over 400 comments on our web page. That's over 10%. Over 10% of the drivers who commented were more concerned with the loss of split time, even though the comment period was advertised to collect comments on the 11 hours and the 34 hour restart. If we'd have had more time to work on it, the percentage would be higher. That is a lot of drivers who feel aggrieved by the loss of the split sleeper berth provision of HOS rules.

I'm a driver, as you are. I let the matter lay for a while, because I had to drive and because I had work to do on my truck. I adapted to the new rules, but never will I be content with them. I worked a lot of years using split sleeper rules and made the best, most efficient use of my time, both sleeping and driving, under those rules. I feel that a federal mandate of 8 continuous hours of time in a bunk is an invasion of privacy, contrary to principles of safe operation, and makes difficult the efficient use of my time.

I am presently contemplating what should be the most efficient move to make at this point. It would seem to me that even though the comment period is officially over, the feds might be inclined to, or directed to, pay attention to the driver comments on their site.

I would like to know the names of the people who made the split time decision, and what exactly were the motives for their sudden and unanticipated directive.

Also, it would be a good idea at this point to stay informed with regard to other activity that is presently afoot, since there might be an opportunity for us to get this resolved quickly, if we're paying attention.

For starters, it would be a good idea to write to your congressmen and senators. It would probably also be a good idea to make a comment on the feds' website.

It has been a while since I have been at the feds' web site. I will try to locate the proper page for making a comment and post it here on the forum.

Thank you,



stonefly

This is the comment page.

The fields with the blue # (pound sign), I believe are optional. Only the comment field below is mandatory. That is your comment. If you don't fill any other fields, I think it will be displayed as an "anonymous" comment.



stonefly

I would

I appreciate it.

The best things I can think of at this point are the suggestions I made in my previous post.

It's encouraging that there are still drivers who know what split sleeper time really means are still wanting to have it restored as part of HOS rules.

I'm 62 years old, and I don't know how much longer I'll be driving. My health is still good, so maybe for a long time.

I feel like I have lost a great deal of my personal freedom when on the road, because of intrusive rules that tell me when to go and when to stop, instead of me being allowed to judge that for myself by my own rest requirements.

Let's make our voices heard, do what we can, and see what happens.



stonefly

I would prefer that we get rid of logs altogether, but that isn't likely happen. I still use the split berth but it doesn't work as well as the old split berth. I can live with the current rules, but would prefer we went back to the old way and kept the 34 hour reset. The usually busy bodies are already at work to push for yet another change to the hos rules. MADD and the other's that are responsible for our current hos are attempting to change things again. My concern is that if we push too hard for changes then we will allow these people the window they desire to force changes we may not want or need. If the comment time has elapsed then it may not do any good to add more comments. On the other hand, if you can add a comment it can't hurt. The way the current hos are it encourages people to push longer than they should. If we were allowed to stop the clock then I think more would shut down earlier and operate more safely.

The two things that trouble me the most are the loss of the split sleeper berth provision, which has already happened, and the mandatory use of EOBRs, which is looming.

The FMCSA is already considering the EOBR.

As I get back into this controversy, I do find more drivers who would like to go back to the split time rules.

I don't like to beat dead horses, but the split time we have now is not split sleeper berth. It is a split break, but only 8 hours of that break is mandatory bunk time. That's the same mandatory bunk time we always had. The 8 hours bunk time never changed. Before, we could split it up. Now, the 8 hours has to be done in one stretch.

That is why I don't understand why many drivers believe that there is a split sleeper berth provision in effect. The reason it could be trouble is that if enough drivers believe that in fact we do have a split sleeper berth provision, when we ask the feds to restore the true sleeper berth split as it existed before October 1st, 2005, they may think they can get away with telling us that we already have a split berth provision.

Things are not going to get any better for us if we do nothing. I know a lot of drivers are quite satisfied with the rules the way they are. In fact, for a lot of trucking operations, I would have to agree that the present rules are fine. For the kind of work I do, the present rules mess me up considerably. I've been living with them since 2005, but I have never learned to like them.

When the rules changed in 2004, I found in short order that they worked fine for me, and I don't there were many drivers who could not adapt well to the first change. The mandatory 8 consecutive hours with no clock stops for naps did mess me up. It messed up quite a lot of other drivers who still want to go back to the old rules.

I still talk to people who want the original split sleeper rules restored. They ask me, "What can we do?" They say, "If you hear of anything happening where we can make a concerted effort, let me know."

If you want to help out, the feds are still taking comments, I believe. The deadline for the comments to be considered was early last year. However, the comment page appears to be open. The last comment was in April. Additionally, the comment period never was designated for split sleeper berth comments. Yet many of the comments, perhaps the most outspoken comments, were the ones that asked for the restoration of split sleeper rules. So I believe it is still worthwhile to make a comment on the feds page, even if it is not technically requested at this time. You never know, it might be the one thing that will help us. You can always write to your congressmen and senators. If they hear about it enough, they may do something.


stonefly

I agree that we need to make our voices heard. The best way is to contact our representatives. If you contact your representatives you need to plan and focus your comments and try to keep extraneous emotion out of it. Speak in a matter of fact manner and quoting facts would not hurt. One thing that has always worked against those who work in this industry are the drivers themselves. Most are unwilling to take a few minutes to write a letter or make a phone call to their representatives. It is easy to complain. It is quite another to take that first step to action.

I have a plan.

Who would be willing to help by doing a little googling?

There are three particular areas of study involved. There have been studies done in these areas. I have seen them, but don't have them at my fingertips.

1. Studies indicating that drivers of 4 wheelers are at fault in the majority of collisions involving big trucks.

2. Studies indicating that fatigue is more of a factor in 4 wheeler collisions than it is in collisions involving big trucks.

3. Studies indicating that fatigue is low in the hierarchy of factors leading to big truck accidents.

The more studies we can find the better. No one can do it alone. Here is where we can work together.



stonefly

So your plan is to point fingers at others. Interesting.

It has been a while since I have looked at this. If I remember correctly, 76% of accidents involving trucks are the fault of a 4 wheeler. When you look at numbers you need to see how they were compiled. I believe that when these numbers were compiled that ALL trucks were put into the pool which included pickup trucks. You should be able to find these on the federal website. In fact, they are probably broken down by state. I don't recall seeing any figures that show fatigue involving 4 wheelers. There could be some studies done by the insurance industry. Some colleges have done studies. I believe Virginia Tech has done some studies involving crashes. In fact, I think they are one of the groups that did a study that found that it is safer for all traffic to travel at the same speed.

The fact that this is the case is all the more reason why we, as professionals, need the tools to keep us from becoming a target for the general public. By adjusting the HOS regulations using proven scientific methods, it is putting us in a safer position to drive defensively.

In fact, the only real argument that I'm seeing against it is of the monetary variety, which does nothing to help with defensive driving.

Can you find that study, GMAN?



stonefly

There are crash statistics on the federal website. I don't recall whether these numbers came from their site or another study. I will see what I can find.

Thanks



stonefly

I don't see any good reason to bring back split sleepers. It takes a few hours for a person to go into a "deep" sleep. Fragmented sleep is never good for you.

However what I would like to see changed is the 14 hour rule. I think any sleeper period 2 or more continuous hours should stop the 14 hour clock. That way someone can take a nap during the afternoon without worry, or a guy during the night can take a small nap and still make it to his destination. Then just take 8 hours to reset 11/14 hour rules. The way it is now if you take a 2 hour nap you actually have a 22 hour day if you do the 8/2 split, which is what they were trying to get away from.

Naps working against you is ridiculous.

Bah give up already, you aren't going to win against the government, it is a pointless battle. There are too many people with bigger pockets against it then you.

Don't get me wrong, I am not 'caving in' to government, but it is corrupt, the democratic way is gone. Want the split sleeper birth back? then grow bigger pockets then the opposition.

As a matter of fact, come up with a couple million $$$, and produce a 30 second commercial to be aired on prime time networks at prime time! If you put the 'safety' spin on it and show how the government is keeping us from getting the rest we need to do our jobs safely, and show it in a nice dramatic fashion, people love a good accident on TV, even better when it is a big rig! the american people will gobble it all up and a lot will voice their opinions!

Who ever came up with that "14 HOURS " idea, must be not too smart. Unless he is the terrorist, and wants a maximum damage. Then he is brilliant!
Once you've started, clocks is start ticking, you are sit a bit here, a bit there...clocks still ticking, time is short, you want to stop for a meal? Clocks are ticking...Tired and want to take a nap? Clocks are ticking.. Gotta make a living, gotta go...Of course there are other ways, but speaking legally, that's your only option...
Is it really hard to comprehend...? Sometimes, that makes me wondering...Who are those people!?

I always thought it was "Big Business" that came up with the 14 and 11 stuff.

If the "Anti" crowd had their way, we would all be working 8am to 5pm and not be permitted on the roads during daytime traffic.

This is the federal website address. I don't have much time to do a lot of research on this but you can check this to see if it helps. I will make a couple of phone calls this coming week and see if I can find who wrote the article.


www.fmcsa.dot.gov/facts-research/research-technology/report/Large-Truck-Crash.../Index-2005LargeTruckCrashFacts.htm

Here's a good one:

Most fatal crashes involving heavy trucks are not the fault of truckers, U-M study says.

+1
It'd be nice to stop the 14 hour clock.

OK, I just had one of my "out of the box" moments. :lol: Have you noticed that the ones making the rules tend to only work within a 24 hr. frame? They base everything on a 24 hr. day. That is something very hard to do in this industry. What if they were to look at a 48hr. or even a 72hr. window? I'm not saying drive for 24 straight, just maybe like 14 and then a min. of a 4hr. break then a max of say 6hr. of driving again followed by a full 10hr break.

Now I'm just throwing some numbers out there, no FACTS to back them up. Just saying there needs to be some flexibility in the total picture for the driver to make the delivery ( or pick-up ) on time and still get the rest to do so safely.

All the studies I've seen, seem to be based on a 24hr. period.


Comments please,


Ridge

Oh yea,

One more piece of useless knowledge from Ridge: A study I read MANY years ago when I worked in the medical field talked about "sleep/wake" cycles of humans. In short..... a 24hr. cycle is NOT a normal cycle for humans. ;)

I absolutely couldn't agree more. How I slept two days ago affects how alert I am today. I may also need more sleep.

It's the chronic fatigue that needs to be eliminated. When I came off nights, it took me FOUR WEEKS to finally catch up on my sleep and feel normal again! I feel fantastic now.

The problem with the hos has always been the "cookie cutter" approach they use. Not everyone has the same need for rest. I normally sleep from 4-6 hours per night. That works for me. If I sleep for 8 hours then I am groggy all day long. It is like being hung over. I know some people who need as much as 10 hours sleep per day and could not function with 6 hours as I can. It would be best if we could stop the clock without losing our work day and get the rest we need. There are days in which I could run 16 hours and others where I don't feel like running 4. If our livelihood depends on working within a certain time frame then we are going to work whether we should or not so that we can earn a living. The ones who make up these rules do so without having driven themselves or talking to those of us who must deal with these rules. I can work within the current hos rules but it would be much better if I could stop the clock when I needed to take a break. The old hos made much more sense because we could stop the clock and take a break as needed. If we kept the old hos and the current 34 hour reset that would be the best of both worlds. A 24 hour reset would be more ideal. In fact, I think it would be best to simply have a set number of hours we could work each day and not even consider the total for the week. We are probably the only profession where we are penalized for taking a break during our work day.

Didnt know they did away with it.. But when your tired or just bored of driving, sleep is a good way to pass time.. but those idots who make the rules and dont live the life our clueless..

I can't get that link to work for me.



stonefly

You cant get the split sleeper berth to work for you either. What else is new?

That is because the posted url is broken. I have posted it as a hyperlink below. All I had to do was got to the FMCSA site and search for "Large-Truck-Crash".

Large Truck Crash Facts 2005-February 2007 - Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Thanks.



stonefly

I am glad that you found the site.

there should be NO rules about how long you can work or drive, you should be able to rest when you need to and drive when you want, the laws dont protect anyone, if a driver is going to run tired, he is going to do it whether there is a law or not, if a company is going to want you to run tired, same thing, if these laws are so good and make sure we are rested, then why whenever a big truck crashes, the first thing they say is " the driver apparently fell asleep"

I agree, Fredog. Logs and hos rules do little, if anything, to provide a greater level of safety. I don't think you could prove that restricting hours of driving make the roads safer. It would be interesting to have a study where you have two groups of drivers. In one you have those who log. The other group doesn't log but rests when they are tired and drives when they are not. I would guarantee that there would likely be fewer accidents from the group who didn't log. I would also expect the non logging group would be better rested.

People who would participate in such a study are not the ones I'd be worried about.

If I was part of the second group I probably wouldn't get any more miles. Maybe a little more.

What would change is those really early morning deliveries, I'd probably have a nap in the afternoon. Due to the 14 hour rule usually I just slug it out.

This is one of the main reason I have no desire to EVER cross the border in a truck!

In Canada we can still use the spilt-sleeper option...just DON'T try it down there! I use it all the time, and it works for me. I haven't slept more than 4 or 5 hours at a time since my FIRST of THREE shoulder operations back in 1990. I wouldn't be able to get up if I layed down that long!

I remember back in the bad old days before we had to run logbooks, I also remember WAY LESS truck accidents & being able to STOP when we were tired, have a nap if needed, etc. I long for those days. I'm pretty sure we drove LESS miles then too, for one the pay was a heck of alot better & we didn't donate the time we do now.

I like the 13 hour drive time we get up here, but then that's the way our cities are set up...we need the extra time to get where we are going. I also like the fact that we can split off 2 hours off our 10 hour break for meals or short rest periods without stopping our 16 hour clock, the only stipulation being that the breaks must be 30 minutes or longer to count. On the old rules we had to take breaks after a certain amount of driving time...thankfully they never took that away from us. At least they realized that 13 hours of non-stop driving is dangerous.



Do you spend more time north or south of the border allan?