Rev:
Quote:
|
Companies are only immune until the FMCSA shows up at their doorstep and starts imposing fines. But I understand where you are coming from - the reward for allowing drivers to log illegally can far outweigh the penalties.
|
The economic impact far outweighs the penalties. Carriers with a less than satisfactory rating can no longer remain self insured. Carriers with less than satisfactory ratings loose valuable customers. Carriers with less than satisfactory ratings pay higher insurance premiums.
Procedures have been developed to pierce the corporate veil for carriers that shut down operation “A” to become operation “B”. Once the veil is pierced the new company inherits the old company’s SAFESTAT information and is prosecuted for running the OOS order.
GMAN:
Quote:
|
If companies checked all logs all the time and did their comparisons on each log turned in then it would increase their cost of doing business way too much.
|
There’s no need to check every driver… Every roadside inspection performed is available to the public at
A & I a carrier’s problem drivers have already been identified. Carriers are at a much greater advantage when it comes to checking for false logs as the carrier knows what the driver’s activities are.
Quote:
|
Much of the cost we incur as a carrier goes for compliance issues.
|
How much profit is lost from drivers/vehicles being placed OOS? Isn’t there an obligation to provide reliable customer service? Couldn’t safety be directly tied to customer service?
Seems to me it’s money well spent.
Quote:
|
It is still the responsibility of the driver to make sure that he runs compliant.
|
It’s also the carrier’s responsibility to ensure the driver has the hours to operate
BEFORE they offer the driver the load.
Quote:
|
For those who think the EOBR's are a great idea you don't have to pay for them. You also may not like the cost to your paycheck should this come to pass. Some of these ideas, such as EOBR's, may sound good on paper, for those who must comply with dealing with them it could be a nightmare.
|
Frito Lay has used EORBs since at least 1993.
Seems to me many carriers want the “Don’t ask, don’t tell philosophy regarding HOS. Carriers want to bury their head in the sand and ignore drivers’ false logs.
Quote:
|
None of these so called safety concerned citizen groups seem to understand that everyone has a different body clock. Just like the hos rules, it encourages falsification to work around the driver's body clock. I doesn't matter what the hos says, if the driver is tired then he needs to rest.
|
Most modes of transportation have HOS for the person responsible for other’s safety:
Pilots:
Quote:
|
An Airline Pilot is only permitted to fly 100 Flying Hours in any 28 day period by law. The maximum time on duty allowed normally is 14 hours. If delays occur up to 16 hours may be worked. Depending on the type of Airline and Route structure will determine the actual hours. Some Airline Pilots for example work six days working three
|
Railroad Employees:
Quote:
|
For the first time ever the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) will have authority to regulate railroad worker hours of service and will provide greater focus on risk reduction to improve safety in the railroad industry under a rail safety reauthorization bill submitted to the Congress today, announced FRA Administrator Joseph H. Boardman.
|
Truckers are no different, without some maximum standards set drivers would go totally ape.
Quote:
|
We need to throw the logs away and treat this like any other profession. If we get tired, we rest. We don't attempt to work around some electronic monitoring system to get our job done. We use common sense. Oops! I forgot, common sense doesn't come into play in this business.
|
Gman you’re funny.
GOLFHOBO:
Quote:
|
And most Polish citizens speak very good English, and could NEVER have gotten a job driving a truck in America without a license and the ability to ASK for the job in English.
|
Yeah, there are no carriers in the greater Chicago area that have Polish speaking dispatchers; the FMCSA revised their policy for OOS and developed a standard operational tests to tests drivers’ ability to speak English before placing them OOS. Naw, there isn’t a problem with non-English speaking drivers.
Quote:
|
Sorry..... just don't BUY IT! IF, and I repeat IF, a Polish immigrant in California could get ANY job driving a truck with no licence or CDL, I doubt seriously that that "outlaw" company would have him driving across state lines all the way to Indiana!
|
Yeah, there’s no way a small fleet owner would hire an illegal alien and have them drive cross country without a CDL. Much as the carrier interviewed and when asked for payroll records it was explained they were six months behind on payroll. Turns out the drivers were indentured servants who were smuggled into the US and now driving truck. Naw there was no CDL scandal where several state employees were prosecuted for selling CDLs to people. Every one is above board and only hiring drivers with impeccable driving records.
Quote:
|
Naw.... just TOO much BS for me to swallow!
|
Absolutely, keep your head buried in the sand. The carriers doing the things mentioned have no competitive edge and able to bid lower on freight than your employer. You are in no danger of losing your job and having to drive for some sleaze ball outfit for half the money you’re earning now.
Get a clue GH, the job you save maybe your own.
Be safe.
Dumb drivers...
