I ain't gettin' on no airplane.

No they wouldn't. My assessment is that "The most dangerous part of the mandatory eight hour sleep break is the part that counts blocks of bunk time shorter than eight hours as a driver's working hours." Simply stated, all of a driver's working hours are contained within the fourteen hour clock. An eight hour bunk break can extend the fourteen hour deadline, but it doesn't add any hours of work time to the fourteen hours. If a driver has to drive 11 hours of the 14, has spent time at a loading dock, fueling, doing a pre-trip, weighing, using a restroom, or eating, there is probably not going to be much left of 14 minus 11. The loading time alone could eat up most or all of the three hours. Therefore, any time a driver gets sleepy during his 11 hours, he'll be in a position where bunk time will use up his working hours. Effectively, he could spend needed time in the bunk, but that time will count against his 14 hours. Anybody who says that is not "bunk time being counted as work time" is playing a game of semantics.

I won't argue that there is no such thing as cumulative sleep deficit. However, regardless of any sleep studies done by anyone, we shouldn't overlook the point that a driver can become sleepy at any time. It can happen 1 hour into a shift after a 10 hour break. It would be amazing if a driver could get through 11 straight hours of driving without becoming sleepy. It can happen after a meal. It can happen because of many factors. Most importantly, it can happen to someone who has had plenty of sleep. In fact, it happens quite often. For most people, it is relatively inconsequential. When it happens to a driver, the driver must get off the road. Nothing else matters. The reasons for spontaneous sleepiness may never be understood, but for a driver, the only responsible course of action is to get off the road.

None of that has anything to do with sleep deficit. What is does relate to is the predicament where a driver is sleepy but cannot afford to lose whatever time remains from his 14 hours. It is a predicament where his common sense is at odds with the reality of a delivery requirement. It is a predicament where if the driver stops for a much needed nap, he will not be legal to meet a delivery requirement. If loading time has taken up the better part of the three hours left after 11 hours of driving are subtracted, then management of time on the part of the driver has nothing to do with the problem he faces.

Sleep studies have nothing to do with that predicament. Sleep studies are geared toward long term sleep deficit and irregular hours of sleep. The split sleeper berth provision that was removed from HOS regulations had little to do with quantity of sleep, and everything to do with timing of sleep. As far as regularity is concerned, over the road truck driving hours are not anywhere near 9 to 5. I for one, do not want a 9 to 5 job. If I did, I wouldn't want to be a truck driver. I wouldn't own a tractor and trailer. Trucking hours are as irregular as they ever were. The removal of the split sleeper berth provision did nothing to make the trucker's life one of regular hours.

Therefore, sleep studies have little to do with the split sleeper berth provision, except for the notion of eight continuous hours of sleep every night. That is a pie in the sky goal for most independent OTR truckers.

What about stress?

In the trucking business, the prospect of being forced to take eight hours of sleep when one does not want to, or physically cannot, sleep for eight hours, can be stressful to the point where more harm than good is accomplished. When I go to sleep, and wake up spontaneously, I don't want to go back to sleep. If I have part of my journey in front of me, I wanna go, not sit around twiddling my thumbs waiting for my eight hours to be up. The most important thing in the trucking business is to be able to get sleep when it is needed. The rules following the loss of the split sleeper berth provision make it difficult for a driver to get sleep when he needs sleep, and often mandate a driver to park his truck when he doesn't need sleep.

That is my assessment, and there are no sleep studies that have anything to do with it. Why? Because sleep studies are done under controlled circumstances, and the many factors involved in the life of a trucker are outside of those circumstances. No scientist would ever try and back up his work when he knew that factors outside of his control had tainted his experiments. Truckers are not laboratory specimens.



So you broke the law, like so many of us do, because you needed sleep. Then you completed the trip safely, but illegally. So much for the safety value of present HOS rules.


Yes, I believe what you have just stated is exactly that which is presently happening in the land of the free and the home of the brave. Are you going to lie down for it or are you going to exercise your freedom of speech? This matter is quite a good opportunity for those who believe in freedom of speech.


The EOBR will be the snapping shut of the jaws. Once you have an EOBR in your truck, a cop only needs to take a quick peek and you're busted, busted for taking that nap.



I listen to drivers.

Once, years ago, I waited on line at a receiving window at a cold storage in McDonough, GA. There was a fellow there, a family man, and he was smoking one cigarette after another as he told his story, between drags. I think he was a Werner driver, or maybe it was some other outfit that had gone paperless. He told about a predicament where he was 15 minutes away from a drop, but was out of time. The guy was having a tough time explaining to us what they had done to him, because I think it hurt too much. They were either gonna fine the hell out of him for missing an appointment, if he stopped where he was, or they were going to fine the hell out of him for going over his driving time, if he went ahead and made the delivery. They let him make the choice. I forget what he said that he did. That wasn't the important part of the story.

No hard working family man truck driver in the United States of America should have to put up with anything like that. Yet, for sure, we'll have somebody say something like, "Well, the guy shoulda' managed his time better."

I don't know if you checked this out yet. There are a lot of comments, and we worked real hard to glean them from the comment period for the 11th hour driving and the 34 hour restart when they were asking for input from the public. There were many comments on the loss of the split sleeper berth provision although that was not specifically why the comment period was designated. What you see on that web page is just the tip of the ice berg. We couldn't get all the comments by any means because it was a lot of work, and we're only talking about the ones who commented. There are many drivers who want to see the return of the split sleeper berth provision who do not write in. (I wrote the intro, for the benefit of non-truckers who visit the site. If you want you can just go to the bottom of the page to read comments.)

If you believe like the drivers on this web site, write to your congressmen and senators. This is still the United States of America.



stonefly

You are wrong. There is no split sleeper berth provision. Eight hours of bunk time is mandated. That is the same length of bunk time that has been in required for over 70 years. Now, the eight hours cannot be split into two blocks as it could before. The eight hours must be taken all in one block.

The FMCSA can say 6 is 9 and you would believe it. You definitely are not the type of driver I am hoping to find on this forum, and definitely not the type of American I'm hoping to find. So you needn't respond any further. However, you can read this if you like, so that you can realize you don't know how to read. Then upon realizing your shortcoming, you may decide to take steps to improve yourself.

The complaint is that if a driver gets sleepy during a run and has spent enough time in activities like loading, unloading, fueling, eating, etc..., there does not remain enough time to take a break without the time going against the 14 hour clock. Is that clear enough? The driver will have to make a decision. Forgo rest or miss a delivery time. That is a situation in which a driver should not be placed. Read the comments on our web page. The comments are made by drivers in early 2008, with regard to the loss of the split sleeper berth provision on October 1st, 2005.

For two and a half years, all those drivers, and many more whose comments we didn't get to, have lived with the loss of the split sleeper berth provision. After two and a half years of it, they made their comments. Two and a half years is plenty of time for them to know what they're talking about. Maybe they are more eloquent and better written than I am.

You definitely need to be enlightened. You are in the dark and appear to like living in the dark. You need to wake up and see the light. As I said, you needn't feel that you should respond any further here. Just go to the website there it is...click the link. Read what many other drivers have to say and wake up. You are asleep.

You're right. The way I worded my last post would not be the way I would word a letter to my congressman. Congratulations on catching that, Mr. Good Eyeball. Are you as talented when you're awake?



stonefly

You have no say over who does or does not respond to your posts.

First, Loading, Unloading, and fueling/Pre-trip/post-trip inspection, all are required "On duty" functions, and all eat into the 14 and 70 hour clocks.
The Carrier is responsible for dictating whether the driver is actively engaged in the loading or unloading process. If the Carrier requires the driver to be on-duty during those activities, then the driver must log "On-duty not driving". That eats away at both clocks.

As far as the driver having to decide whether to rest or not to rest, because of having used hours loading or unloading, and making his or her delivery on-time, the only driver that this decision bothers, is the driver whom has no common sense. Only the driver whom feels obligated to drive while sleepy does so. Yes....The Shipper and Consignee should manage their business, without depending on the free labor most driver's provide them, BUT that has been the trucking industry problem for 50 years. ONLY the Carrier's can solve that issue.

The decision to rest or not lays solely with the driver. A smart driver takes the needed nap, and log's the time the way it is worked.

The driver comments on that website are mostly complaints from drivers whom can not have it "their way". They most likely are driver's whom had a stop system setup, where by they could stop and see this "Honey" or that "Honey" at the various truck stops. I don't feel sorry for that type driver. Especially the married driver that chooses to play that game. Those type rarely actually sleep during those "rest" periods.

The HOS, as it stands is marginally better than the old 15 hour work day. I do not use the 11th driving hour, unless I am short of a safe place to park. I usually drive 9.5 to 10 hours, based on my appointment times.
Would I do so if I were pulling anything other than a tank? Yup. Pulled flatbed the first couple years of the 14 hour HOS rules. I managed to make the HOS work for me just fine, and I felt more rested and less "hassle" because of it.

KCOIV was right. No cop is going to "pop" a driver for taking a nap. He will however pop a driver for logbook falsification.
"Falsification" falls mostly on the shoulders of the driver. Condoning or encouraging log falsification falls on the shoulder of the Dispatcher, Carrier Management, the Shipper, and the Consignee. YES, all those can be held accountable for a driver falsifying a logbook, based on EOBR's, and paperwork provided to the driver. That accountment only happens, after a fatality or serious injury involved accident.

The reason so many shipper's do not put time stamps on paperwork, is so that truck drivers can falsify their logs. This is coming back to bite them.

No, YOU are wrong. You just refuse to look at the current split sleeper revision as a split sleeper revision!

you keep talking about science etc in your posts, then you of all people should know that a species (drivers in this example) needs to adapt to its ever changing environment (the HOS in this case) or die off. failure to adapt will lead to extinction. there are many who have adapted (and even prospered) to the new HOS of service and would not give up the 34 hour restart for anything. its time to face facts. the old way is gone! adapt and over come!

as for the "I can function on 4 or 5 hours sleep" theory, countless test have proven that prolonged or repeated sleep deprivation has the same effect as alcohol. so your argument sounds like the drunk saying "I drive just fine with a few beers" when the test prove otherwise!

get some sleep driver. based on reading your argument I think you need it. your showing classic signs of sleep deprivation. muddled inconsistent thoughts. in ability to reason and moodiness.

:lol2::lol2::lol2::lol2::lol2::lol2:

No, matcat, you are wrong. I refuse to recognize the current split sleeper revision as a split sleeper revision because it is not a split sleeper berth provision.

You have allowed your mind to become so soft that you will recognize what the feds require you to recognize, and nothing else.



stonefly

Still waiting for some sort of evidence that the federal sleep studies are wrong....

See that is exactly what I said, I am right, you are wrong.

It IS a split sleeper berth revision, 8 and 2, not 5 and 5, or any other variation. You want it changed, fine, write the letters, call the congressmen, do what you must, BUT stop saying it is not a split sleeper revision when it is, just because it is not setup how you like it, doesn't mean it is not still one.

I have no say over who does or does not respond to my posts.

The replies I've been getting aren't helping a bit. I know what the split sleeper berth provision was, and I'm trying to have it restored as part of HOS regulations.

You live in a country that is referred to as The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave. Yet in an occupation that has been considered one of the last bastions of personal freedom, you are content with regulations that tell you not only how much to sleep, but when to sleep. It doesn't bother you at all. Judging by what I've seen here thus far, you believe whatever the feds tell you to believe and do whatever they say without a word of protest. You are the best behaved bunch of Great Americans who ever cruised a buffet, or maybe you are just a little soft headed from eating too much. Thus far, you are definitely not what I am looking for. There is no need to respond. I can't stop you from doing so, but you're wasting your time.

What about the feds' web site?

Perhaps you missed this one, Orangetxguy…


For anyone who wanted to see studies and statistics, here is something from the Missouri DOT. This is a comment they made to the feds on February 6, 2008. Here is the web page containing MoDOT's comment. It is comment # 2927. Click on the link to view MoDOT's comment on the feds' website. FMCSA (Sorry, the link takes you to the main page and not the MoDOT comment. The comment on the feds' site is the same as is posted here. If you care to see it on the feds site, look at the middle of the page to the right, below the second gray bar that says "documents." Click "number of results to display," up to 250. Then, go to the left of the page, and click the double arrows to the right of number "15." Wait until "15" shows up in the page box. Then click the single arrow to the left of the page block until the number in the box goes down to "12." The MoDOT comment is on this page, near the bottom, # 2927. The numbers are on the left. Look for FMCSA-2004-19608-2927. Look to the right of PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS and click the icon that looks like a small piece of paper with the top left corner folded down. That will bring up MoDOT's comment.) This is from the FMCSA comment web site for the 11 hours diving and the 34 hour restart provisions. Because there never was a specific comment period for the split sleeper berth provision, many commentors, including MoDOT, took the opportunity to give their views on the split sleeper berth problem.



Missouri Department of Transportation, Division of Motor Carrier Services

General Comment:

The Missouri Department of Transportation, Division of Motor Carrier Services partnered with Missouri's motor carrier industry to comment on the Interim Final Rule on Drivers Hours of Service.

During a recent meeting, MoDOT Motor Carrier Services, several Missouri motor carrier associations and motor carrier industry representatives resolved that both the 11-hour limit and 34-hour restart regulations should remain intact. The existing rules that allow 11 hours of driving time within a 14-hour window from the start of the workday, following 10 consecutive hours off duty (11-hour limit) and the 34 hour restart provision that allows drivers to restart weekly on-duty time limits after the driver has at least 34 consecutive hours off duty (34-hour restart) have not detrimentally impacted safety or motor carrier operations.

However, we have a primary concern with the current rule's inability to allow drivers to safely extend the 14-hour window in conjunction with a split-sleeper berth provision to increase transportation efficiency.

It is important that all parts of the rule include provisions that will make it effective, safe and efficient. The U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration conducted a multiyear, nationwide study of factors that contribute to truck crashes.

The Large Truck Crash Causation Study examined reasons for serious crashes involving large trucks (trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating over 10,000 pounds). From the approximately 120,000 large truck crashes recorded between 2001 and 2003, a sampling of 963 crashes resulted in 249 fatalities and 1,654 injuries. The study further focused on driver involvement and assigned the c rashes to four critical drivers related groupings. They were driver non-performance, recognition, decision, and performance.

Of particular significance was the driver non-performance category. It included crashes in which drivers fell asleep, were disabled by a heart attack or seizure, or were physically impaired. Fatigue was only cited as a critical reason for a crash in 12 percent of the driver non-performance category.

Other associated factors were collected for each vehicle in each crash. According to the study, the top 10 factors coded for large trucks and their drivers in descending order were:
1) brake problems,
2) traffic flow interruption,
3) prescription drug use,
4) traveling too fast for conditions,
5) unfamiliarity with roadway,
6) roadway problems,
7) required to stop before crash,
8) over-the-counter drug use,
9) inadequate surveillance, and
10) driver fatigue.

Driver fatigue was the least of the associated factors.

Although these comments focus on the FMCSA's current rule making, serious consideration should be given to future rule making in order to alleviate real world problems with the HOS rules.

Flexibility in the HOS rules has always played a major role in the balance between safety and productivity. Each individual is different and obtains rest in different ways under different circumstances. Each shipment that a driver takes has a particular set of influences that affect that driver's ability to obtain rest. With so many variables and influences on the driver's itinerary, the rules should empower drivers to get the sleep they need when they need it. Unfortunately, this is the not the case with the inflexibility of the current sleeper berth provision.

The inability for drivers to select individualized periods of rest presents highway safety hazards. Drivers complying with the hours-of-service regulations are forced to stop wherever they can. As a consequence, truck drivers park on shoulders and entrance/exit ramps. In 2007, the average quarterly number of trucks parked in Missouri rest areas and lots exceeded the average number of available truck parking spaces by 19.6 percent. When designated truck parking is full drivers park anywhere they can including the entrance and exit ramps of rest areas and nearby overpasses. In 2007 over 1,150 trucks parked on ramps within 15 miles of rest areas.

In some ways, the recent changes to HOS rules have taken positive steps towards providing flexibility. However, additional adjustments can make them more conducive to the drivers' real world environment. One possibility to improve flexibility is to offer a true split sleeper berth option. One that does not put the eight hour restriction on the driver or restricts the work day, but would allow him/her to take the ten hours of rest as they need. Doing so would allow continued compliance with the rest requirements and also provide the driver with the flexibility to meet personal rest needs and conform to their itinerary. Focusing on drivers only, the Large Truck Crash Causation Study rated driver fatigue tenth among the top twenty factors attributed to poor driver performance resulting in a crash. We recognize that fatigue is still a major issue, but we do not agree with the new sleeper berth rest option that restricts the driver's ability to reduce that fatigue. Drivers are professionals and they deserve to be empowered with choices on how to obtain their rest.


I'm still looking for people who want to overturn the FMCSA's directive of October 1st, 2005, the directive that disallows clock stops for naps and split time logging of rest periods.



stonefly

Let us say you pull a refer, and you KNOW you got long ass waits at a shipper or receiver, you drive 4 hours, go to shipper to get loaded, take an 8 hour sleeper berth time, now you can drive a whole 7 hours! Let us assume you get to your receiver in 6 hours, and you do so, it takes 2 hours to unload, now you take a quick nap. Wow, you now still have 5 hours of drive time! Not very complicated, you where able to split it, blah blah blah blah boo hoo you can't do 5 and 5. Sure I think it would be nice to bring the old split back, and I am all for it, but recognize that there is still a split sleeper berth capacity, it might not be AS useful, but it is still useful if utilized properly.

I'm repeating myself here, but for your sake, I don't mind. The required sleep period has always been eight hours, not ten. The split you are referring to is a split of the 10 hour break period, yes. However, the required bunk time or sleep time is still 8 hours, not 10. The 2 hours in addition to the 8 hours do not have to be used for sleep. A full ten hours off duty must be taken before the 14 hour clock can be reset, but only 8 hours of that has to be sleep, not 10 hours.

The 8 hour sleep break, the only amount of sleep that has been required under HOS regulations, pre-2003, post-2003 and post 2005, until the present... 8 hours...

On January 1st, 2004, the first comprehensive rule change in many years was enforced. Because the break time had become 10 hours instead of 8, splitting the break into two blocks meant that the total of the two blocks had to add up to 10, not 8. However, only 8 of those 10 hours had to be bunk time.

It's not difficult to see why you're confused. It can be confusing until you understand it. With the new rules, where the break could still be broken into no more than two blocks, and in spite of the fact that only 8 of the 10 hours had to be sleep, the only way to legally split time was 2/8, 3/7, 4/6, 5/5, 6.5/3.5, etc...

During the period from January 1st, 2004, until October 1st, 2005, that is the way that we split our time, and any block of bunk time 2 hours or greater would stop the 14 hour clock.

After October 1st, 2005, the 8 hours bunk time could no longer be split, and no block of sleep less than 8 hours would stop the 14 hour clock. It was at this point that many drivers like myself began to feel the pinch of not being able to pull over for a rest any time we felt the need, because our 3, 4, 5, 6 hour or more sleep break no longer stopped the 14 hour clock, and the break that we felt that we needed, if taken, would mean that we would be illegal to complete our delivery on time.

True, the 10 hour break can still be split into two segments, 8 and 2, but only 8 hours stops the clock. This is particularly difficult doing back to back runs on the eastern seaboard. From a lot of experience doing those runs, I know that there is ample time to get plenty of rest, but it is difficult to find 8 consecutive hours to park the truck and sleep.

During the course of 24 hours, I might get 3 and 5, 4 and 4, 2 and 6 sometimes 5 and 5 and sometimes even 6 and 6. There were many times when I couldn't find a good paying load and I would take an entire day, getting all the sleep I want and having time to fish, if I was near a river.

It is harmful to me to spend 5 or 6 hours in a bunk and not have it count toward my sleep requirement. I'm 62 years old, in good health, with a lot of experience in the world, and when I wake up after a period of rest, feeling rejuvenated and ready to work, I want to go, not twiddle my thumbs wasting time waiting for the clock to come around. Once I wake up feeling refreshed it is impossible to go back to sleep. It is harmful to even try to do so.

I have done more adapting to unusual sleep patterns and restrictive regulations than anyone should have to, and I'm sure that I'm in for more trouble if the EOBR's become mandated. So any more drivel about "adjust or get out" will happily go in one ear and out the other because I know the one who is offering the words of wisdom is likely to have done less adapting than myself, otherwise they would not be tossing cheap advice in such a casual manner.



stonefly

The example you describe is what I refer to as a "milk run," an easy one, where the HOS regs coincide nicely with drive time and loading time. I'd like to have you as my dispatcher so you could find me a lot of loads like it.

In your example, you took 8 hours bunk time at the shipper. That is not splitting your time. The 8 hour bunk requirement has never changed. Before January 1st, 2004, it was enforced as 8 hours which could be broken up as 2/6, 3/5, 4/4, etc...

Many times, because of the time factors involved, that 8 hours isn't doable. If split time were still allowed, it wouldn't matter.

After January 1st, 2004, the break time was upped to 10 hours, but only 8 of that 10 was required to be bunk time. Since splitting time could still only be done with no more than 2 blocks of time, 2/6 had to become 2/8, 3/5 had to become 3/7, etc... Most importantly for drivers like myself was the fact that any bunk time 2 hours or greater would stop the 14 hour clock. After October 1st, 2005, that clock stop for short sleep breaks was no longer allowed.

I do find some short runs where the present configuration of HOS rules doesn't hurt me. However, there are a lot of runs where they put me in a real bind, because there are not that many loads around. If a load pays good, and I can log it legal, according to the miles, I take it, not knowing what the future may hold. If I get tied up at a loading dock on a run that is 550 to 600 miles, I've got trouble. Not that I won't be able to get plenty of rest, not that 600 miles is too tough to do, but the kind of trouble no driver wants, log book trouble. In many cases it's unforeseen. You can try and talk to the broker, you can try and reschedule, but even if one can succeed in doing so, it would probably mean a lost day's work and the possibility that the broker won't use the truck anymore. I'd call on a load, and he'd say, "Sorry, it's covered."

Before anyone says, "Well, that's better than someone getting killed by a fatigued driver," remember fatigue isn't involved here. There is time for rest, time for driving, and no need to rush. Nothing unsafe about the run, it just won't fit into the tight little FMCSA box, because of an unforeseen loading delay.

Every load is different. Each one has different miles on it, different shipping delays, different receiving delays, different traffic, for example, urban versus rural, different weather, different terrain, mountains...? or flatland...? different delays in fueling, different food, add in anything unforeseeable.

A good read is the Missouri Department of Transportation's comment to the feds. Maybe you'll have read it before I post this reply.


stonefly

You're a wildman on the keyboard, but you can't read.



stonefly

How so?

Actually, no I didn't miss that piece. In fact, I read it long before you bothered to post it here.

Something you seem to not have grasped. That statement, while issued in the name's of the MoDOT Motor Carrier Services, and the several "Missouri motor carrier associations and motor carrier industry representatives" as you put it.


You do of course realize whom those "associations" and "representatives" work for, don't you? They work for Prime, O&S Trucking, R&R Trucking, YRC Worldwide, Melton Trucking, Conway Freight, and whatever other large trucking corporation is involved in their respective groups.

Regardless, the first paragraph, is the most important paragraph. It is what "Legislators" in Washington DC will pay attention to.

I seriously doubt that the courts are going to "revisit" the HOS regulations again, even though all our favorite supporters (:roll:) are even now taking their next shot at it.

As I already said. That earlier website you refered to, is mostly the BBR's, whom want to run from truck stop to truck stop, not resting because they stop to play, complaining because the HOS does not allow them to do as they please.

I seldom hear any driver complaining about their use of the HOS. Those that do are the usual suspects. They need a shower. They need to clean the trash out of the truck. What they really need, is to just do their job and quit complaining.

I have, this year, driven from the east coast to the west coast, in under 70 hours, and did it within the hours of service, as a solo driver. I loaded one load at a chemical plant in NJ, unloaded it, at a consumer products plant in Saint Louis, reloaded at a chemical plant in Sauget IL and drove to the Los Angeles area, legally, within the HOS. After arriving in the Los Angeles area, I did a 34 hour reset, before delivering the load, at it's scheduled time.


IF you and your friends have the money to fight the groups that are "ANTI Truck Driver", knock yourself out. You will be wasting time, money and energy.


Personally, I have better things to do with life.

One other thing. Shaun Hannity and his "KoolAid" are not on my list of favorite drinks.

You would think that a 62 year old man would know by now that winning like a little girl doesn't fix the problem. It would also seem that you have not learned to adapt at all. You still complain and wish things where the way they used to be instead of learning how to make the new situation work to your advantage.

You have come on here asking what everyone thinks of the HOS and split sleeper birth. most have not agreed with your opinion because they are not having the problems that you seem to be having. they have adapted and changed and learned to prosper under the new HOS. your reply? that they don't know how to adapt as well as you. I believe driver that it is you who is wrong.

...you win...I'm movin' on...



stonefly

what about whining like a big girl?

winning like a little girl

what did he win?

big girls don't cry... I believe their is even a song about that.

p.s. nice catch on the whining not winning. lol oops

I don't know but I've never won anything. I'm kinda excited!!!

The Patriot Act passed easily into law. All measures which infringe upon our liberty will be efficient. The removal of the split sleeper berth provision from HOS rules represents a greater loss of human rights than does the Patriot Act. The move was made without public input.

Fundamentally, the removal of the split sleeper berth provision is an unspoken government directive which may be interpreted, "We will tell you when to sleep and why." A populace that can be counted upon to comply with the provisions of such a directive will certainly provide further opportunities for a government to restrict civil liberties. Every time the government takes another step, and the rules are less reasonable, should we respond by becoming more compliant? The enslavement of a populace by any regime need not be a conspiracy. It is essentially a spiritual matter. The only thing necessary for the spirit to envelop us is for good men to do nothing.

The mandatory eight hour block of sleep...the EOBR... We truckers are one step away from having a law enforcement officer know, to the second, when we park our trucks and when we move them. We are two steps away from being being picked off at will and being fined, placed out of service, or perhaps arrested, for unlawfully choosing when to sleep and when to drive.

Every time the government takes another step, it will be done quickly and efficiently. Eventually, if good men do not interfere, Americans will have our global positions tightly monitored, pinned down to the second and to within a meter, by state of the art surveillance technology. This will happen in increments, each in the name of safety, or in the name of safeguarding our freedom. The preceding is not far fetched. If the EOBR becomes a mandated part of HOS enforcement, it is only a little farther down the road for the rest of America.



stonefly

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

The enslavement of a populace by any regime need not be a conspiracy. It is essentially a spiritual matter. The only thing necessary for the spirit to envelop us is for good men to do nothing.

Not being able to adapt to new regulations is not enslavement. It is laziness. If everyone were incapable of adapting, you might possibly have a valid point.

I prefer to have the world adapt to me

So does stonefly, apparently. Too bad that only happens when you're a kid, or you're filthy rich.

well, it's too late for the kid part, so I guess I'll get to work on being filthy rich, I got half of it down already:smokin: