[Part Time Dweller]

I see someone finally picked a screen name that describes him to a "T". :lol:

[Useless]

Originally Posted by Part Time Dweller

I see someone finally picked a screen name that describes him to a "T". :lol:

A wee bit new here to be making such assumptions, PTD!!! I didn't get to where I am in life by being a "know-it-all; I did it by listening to people who were smarter than me, and more knowledgeable than I am. Quite to the contrary, I frequently paid then considerable sums of dinero to tell me why I was wrong!!!

The one catch was that they had established track records of knowing what they were talking about!!!

In any event, Welcome To The Board :rock:

As I stated earlier, when it comes to Myth Maker and Dawns ability to serve as "Cut and Paste" Specialist, I will be the first to say that they are amongst the best!!

When it comes to actually knowing what they are talking about, and being able to properly extrapolate and articulate an issue, there have been too many times when each one of them has been proved dead wrong.

We have quite a few real drivers here who have driven more miles in reverse that either one of these people have ever driven foreword. I'd put my money on them.

Once again, Welcome to the board!!!

[Part Time Dweller]

Thanks for the welcome useless. I have lurked here for a while, just decided to join the circus.

Now how did you know I was referring to you? :P

Any ways, I have known Myth Buster on various boards for a long time. He is good at C&P, but what he posts is law, not opinion. whether you want to agree with the law or not, that is your choice. He does agravate some, like you, that would rather hear the truckstop lwyer version than read actual law and make a decision as to how it pertains to them.

[Useless]

Originally Posted by Part Time Dweller

Thanks for the welcome useless. I have lurked here for a while, just decided to join the circus.

Now how did you know I was referring to you? :P

Because you are not the first person to suggest that, nor will you be the last!!

Any ways, I have known Myth Buster on various boards for a long time. He is good at C&P, but what he posts is law, not opinion.

The problem is that in all to many cases, Myth Makers interpretation of the law is all wrong. Any poser can cut and paste.

whether you want to agree with the law or not, that is your choice. He does agravate some, like you, that would rather hear the truckstop lwyer version than read actual law and make a decision as to how it pertains to them.

I don't need a truck stop lawyer; I already have two lawyers who I can consult if I need leagal advice. Myth Maker would have us believe that the rules and regs. which are stipulated exist in the form of "Black and White", which is why attorney's love to get ahold of guys like him. They are very easy to discredit!!

[kc0iv]

Originally Posted by lonewolf

he was not talking about dac,he was talking about reporting the test results to DOT

Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:27 pm Myth_Buster said: "It is imperative for drivers to know their rights and when drug testing is mandated and when carriers have expanded drug and alcohol testing requirements. Test performed outside of the FMCSR cannot be reported as positive to subsequent employers. The same should apply to DAC Services. D & A test results are confidential; any release to an unauthorized party could result in civil action against the offender.

On Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:20 pm Myth_Buster said: "What if the employer fired your sorry azz because you tested positive, then reported to DAC you tested positive?"

Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:15 pm Myth_Buster said:"Not necessarily, if the tests was done outside the parameters of the US DOT requirements then the test cannot be reported as positive."

I know you would like to try to support Myth_Buster but as I have shown you are wrong.

As I said before D.O.T. has NO control over what is reported to DAC.

kc0iv

[Myth_Buster]

Useless:

I still get a laugh when I think about how you listed your so-called "qualificatioons"; ...."been around trucks"........ rode in a logging truck with my uncle when I was 13y/o!!!! DAYUMM!!! That was funny!!!

Well, lets just say that having been involved in trucking since I was 13 has given me a vast understanding of how things work. I consider myself a aware of the issues trucking has problems with. I worked my way up from, helper, to logistics manager, to driver, to computer systems, to enforcement, so I know a thing or three about trucking and it's not limited to what the safety department told me about fudging the regs to get by or what another driver told me. :wink:

I don't need a truck stop lawyer; I already have two lawyers who I can consult if I need leagal advice. Myth Maker would have us believe that the rules and regs. which are stipulated exist in the form of "Black and White", which is why attorney's love to get ahold of guys like him. They are very easy to discredit!!

:wink:

I'd put my cases settled record up against any attorney who have challenged the cases prepared. The cases prepared contain the physical evidence, and applicable cites in the regulations to prove the case.

Docket 22203

The regs have what is referred to as case law. Case law allows the FMCSA's interpretation of the regulation to stand up in court when challenged by attorneys. As an example Roe -vs- Wade is the case law cited by attorneys for women's right to abortion. Please, please don't start a rant on abortion, I'm using the example as I know it is a very familiar case that people will recognize for the discussion offered.

The point is drivers may read the regulations and not be aware of policies and procedures based on case law and the fact the regulation had already been challenged and the court decided the FMCSA's interpretation was factual to the law.

I've said it once and I'll say it again. The information offered is factual, the circumstances are real. People can make a decision on whether or not to use the information to their benefit. The net sayers who bash those knowledgeable in the regulations is irrelevant and the ney sayers are not as well informed as they would like to think.

The point is readers have to make the decision on what to accept. The bickering is moot.

PTD, welcome aboard.

Be safe.

[Useless]

Originally Posted by kc0iv

Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:27 pm Myth_Buster said: "It is imperative for drivers to know their rights and when drug testing is mandated and when carriers have expanded drug and alcohol testing requirements. Test performed outside of the FMCSR cannot be reported as positive to subsequent employers. The same should apply to DAC Services. D & A test results are confidential; any release to an unauthorized party could result in civil action against the offender.

On Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:20 pm Myth_Buster said: "What if the employer fired your sorry azz because you tested positive, then reported to DAC you tested positive?"

Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:15 pm Myth_Buster said:"Not necessarily, if the tests was done outside the parameters of the US DOT requirements then the test cannot be reported as positive."

I know you would like to try to support Myth_Buster but as I have shown you are wrong.

As I said before D.O.T. has NO control over what is reported to DAC.

kc0iv[/quote]

Does appear to be slightly contradictory, does it not??

[kc0iv]

Originally Posted by Myth_Buster

KC0iv

KC, there would have to be a signed release from the driver for the carrier to release the information to DAC.

I haven't seen an employer release statement for DAC; however, if the form did not include a specfic section for releasing information on non-DOT tests then an employee would have a civil case under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

An employer could not release drug test information to DAC services without the employee's written consent. The DOT controls the employer's obligation to safe guard the tests results and not release the data without the written consent of the employee.

Useless, I deal with know it all drivers on a frequent basis. The first words out of their mouth are usally; "Well I didn't know that." "When did the rule change?" or "I've been doing it this way for 20 years and no one has ever said anything before.".

I picture you being one such driver. :twisted:

Despite you and a few others I'll keep pinging away as I know there are some who appreciate the info. :wink:

Be safe.

You have now moved outside the realm of what D.O.T. has to say and into the realm of civil law. Dealing with the Fair Credit Reporting Act is best left to lawyers. Of which I'm sure you are not one.

In addition I would first find out just what employees have sign and not signed before you make these types of blanket statements.

I'd suggest you stick with what you know and leave other matters to those that do know.

kc0iv

[Myth_Buster]

Does appear to be slightly contradictory, does it not??

Not when taken in text, the point was drivers have to know when the employer can or cannot release the information. The original post offered the applicable regulation and cites of the regulations that applied.

The post offered scenarios of when a driver's rights may have been violated.

The post is correct, the side discussions are relevant to the questions asked after the post were made.

Sheesh, get a grip Useless you cannot take the answer to one question and apply it to the topic as a whole.

Just another attempt to distract from the original post and poke holes based on incomplete data.

Be safe.

[Useless]

Originally Posted by Myth_Buster

Not when taken in text, the point was drivers have to know when the employer can or cannot release the information. The original post offered the applicable regulation and cites of the regulations that applied.

The post offered scenarios of when a driver's rights may have been violated.

The post is correct, the side discussions are relevant to the questions asked after the post were made.

Sheesh, get a grip Useless you cannot take the answer to one question and apply it to the topic as a whole.

Just another attempt to distract from the original post and poke holes based on incomplete data.

Be safe.

Now, you are talking in circles, Myth Maker!!

One moment, you want to paint your cut and paste quotations as being "Black and White"; the next thing you know, when someone calls a Bull &h*t Alert on you with your own previous contradictory postings, you try to argue that the situation is not always so black and white!!
:roll: