User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 07-24-2007, 09:16 PM
Fozzy's Avatar
Senior Board Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Redneckistan
Posts: 2,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Default Court rejects 34 hr restart, and the extra hour of driving

BREAKING NEWS: Court rejects HOS restart, additional hour of driving
By Avery Vise

In a significant setback for many trucking companies, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit today, July 24, invalidated two significant pieces of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s hours-of-service regulations – the increase of the daily driving limit to 11 hours from the previous 10 hours, and the 34-hour restart option for drivers’ weekly on-duty limits.

In addition, the court rejected the petition filed by the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association for greater flexibility in use of the sleeper berth, including allowing team drivers to continue to split rest in sleeper berths as they could before the August 2005 revision.

FMCSA's failings in the case appear to have been mainly in how it put the rule together, rather than in what the rule contained. The court concluded FMCSA “violated the Administrative Procedure Act because it failed to give interested parties an opportunity to comment on the methodology of the crash-risk model that the agency used to justify an increase in the maximum number of daily and weekly hours that truck drivers may drive and work.” The court also held that the agency “failed to provide an explanation for critical elements of that methodology.”

What happens now is unclear. When the appeals court rejected the first revised hours-of-service regulation in July 2004, Congress held the new rules in place for about a year while FMCSA worked on a new version. It remains to be seen whether a Democrat-controlled Congress will be so inclined to intervene. On the other hand, given that the flaws cited are essentially procedural, lawmakers might be inclined to hold the current rule in place pending a new rule.

“What happens now is unclear” - Be prepared to see the 34 hour re-start and the 11 hour driving rules vanish sooner rather than later. I will monitor closely!!!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-24-2007, 09:34 PM
Twilight Flyer's Avatar
The Bat Cave
Board Icon
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,712
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Default

That'll throw a wrench into things. Prepare to watch driver and dispatcher heads begin randomly exploding as they try to comprehend yet ANOTHER change in the system. :?
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-24-2007, 09:50 PM
yoopr's Avatar
Board Icon
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 12,859
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Default

I never did the split-sleeper thing but, as I've said many times before, Go back to the Old HOS.
10 on-8 off
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-24-2007, 10:38 PM
golfhobo's Avatar
Board Icon
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: the 19th hole / NC
Posts: 9,647
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Default

WOW!!! First off, forget about the dispatcher's brains..... they never understood them NOR cared!!! But, this could cause MY brain to go into overload!! :shock: :lol:

Could you provide a LINK to this Fozzy??

Personally, I would think that the SAME "stay" will be imposed immediately, to allow the FMCSA to continue with the current rules until this is settled. From what I read, there was AMPLE input from carriers and other organizations.

But, I would loose no sleep over going back to the old, old rules! I agree that drivers SHOULD know best what works for them!

This is SOooo..... typical of the government! :roll:
__________________
Remember... friends are few and far between.

TRUCKIN' AIN'T FOR WUSSES!!!

"I am willing to admit that I was wrong." The Rev.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-25-2007, 12:56 AM
Useless's Avatar
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Default

Fozzy;

I haven't had time to follow this issue. Who challenged the revised rule in the first place??
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-25-2007, 01:23 AM
Fozzy's Avatar
Senior Board Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Redneckistan
Posts: 2,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Useless
Fozzy;

I haven't had time to follow this issue. Who challenged the revised rule in the first place??
Somebody's (not mine) friends at the OOIDA and of course a big rabble of anti-truck safety groups...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-25-2007, 09:17 AM
danske's Avatar
Board Regular
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oregon
Posts: 256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Default

Here are 2 links to this issue. The second article is partisan(eg. It is Bush's fault) and presumptous(eg. tired truckers).

http://www.etrucker.com/apps/news/article.asp?id=61746

http://www.citizen.org/autosafety/Tr...s.cfm?ID=16949
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-25-2007, 04:22 PM
Guest
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Default

For almost 70 years the 10-8 70 hours in 8 days rule worked fine. Then all of a sudden was not good enough for the Shippers and receivers and then the Mega Carriers. They were the reason and the push behind the new and twice rejected now HOS regs when you think about it. Yes under the old ones drivers did push the regs but it when you went home 34 hours later your comapny did not call you and say you have had enough time off.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-25-2007, 05:24 PM
SemperFi's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Default

The "we know what's best for you" crowd is pushing for an eight hour day. Exhibit A:

Quote:
Each year more than 5,000 people are killed and more than 110,000 are injured in large truck crashes. Truck driver fatigue is a major contributor to severe crashes. Many studies have shown that truck driver alertness and performance begin to dangerously deteriorate after about eight hours of consecutive driving. After eight hours of driving, the risk of a truck driver having a crash begins to increase rapidly.
This is the same crowd that wakes up every day with the attitude of "who's going to offend me today"! Good luck truckers!
__________________
"It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." --explaining his troubles winning over some working-class voters - BARACK OBAMA
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-25-2007, 08:16 PM
yoopr's Avatar
Board Icon
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 12,859
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Default

Many studies have shown that truck driver alertness and performance begin to dangerously deteriorate after about eight hours of consecutive driving. After eight hours of driving, the risk of a truck driver having a crash

How Nice-"Many Studies"
I can say there are "Many Studies" That prove otherwise but I'd have to show WHO Did the Studies.
IF they go to 8 hours it will be just about the biggest Disasters to hit Trucking. People are going to bail out of their Profession-Many more trucks are going to be needed to haul the Freight and this in turn is going to bring in a TON of green drivers(No I'm not badmouthing new drivers) and they're gonna be just about the Majority on the Road because the Veteran drivers are going to MORE Fed up than they already are.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply






Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 04:34 PM.


User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.