Question about EOBR's
 

I am gathering information for my letter to the fmcsa concerning mandatory eobr's. I have never used one and never want to. I would like to hear all possible ways that you can cheat while using them. We have a Canadian customer that buys one load per week. Occasionally they will order two loads and our company will have an outside carrier with eobr's take a load to the border where our driver takes the load across because they don't have passports. One driver knew he was about an hour short on his driving time of being able to make it to the meeting point. He told our driver that he gained the extra hour by stopping several times for 5 minutes which let him gain about 10 minutes driving time at every stop. Can anyone better explain how he did that as well as tell about other tricks that help you gain time?

I've been on "E-Log" on Qualcomm for just over a year, and not once in the last year have I been able to squeeze out an extra hour of driving time. Qualcomm does not show driving time if you keep your speed down under 5mph and travel less than 7/10th of a mile, but once you start driving, any driving you might have done at a truckstop or inside a plant or warehouse complex is automaticly deducted from tyour driving time...which is a pain in the *****.

The best thing I like about E-Log.......cops do not question if you are legal or not, when you hand them the panel. They hand it right back without looking...........unless of course you have a little red light blinking for them to see!!

The system doesn't round off your times? As I understand it with paper logs if I stop at 12:05 I should log it as 12:00 and if I resume driving at 12:10 I should log it as 12:15. That would give me 10 minutes "free" driving time.

That is what I assumed he was doing, but I wanted to hear it from someone who is actually using an e-log. The driver said what he was doing would get him through a roadside inspection, but not an in-house audit. I didn't talk to him myself. I'm not sure if he knows that, or just thinks that.

If you would, explain that a little more. Does it accumulate 4 minutes here and 6 minutes there and add it as exact minutes, or does it do any kind of rounding?





Lots of people say "They don't read those letters" or "You are wasting your time". Mark Reddig on Landline Now (OOIDA's radio show) said that the fmcsa is required to read every comment that is sent to them and encouraged people to send in their comments. I have been a member of OOIDA for 17 or 18 years. Many of the members, including me, actually do something about the problems we face besides just whine about it. That is why we have so much influence.

I don't expect to point out something about cheating that they don't know, but as Mark and others have said, if you have facts to back up what you are saying, your letter can make a difference. I am doing research before I even start writing my comment. I did my research before I wrote my comment about the rule changes, which is why several local companies took copies of my letter for their employees and drivers to sign and and send in. People that do nothing but rant get little attention from anyone.

Well......I know that the QC I use logs everything that the truck does, the way it is done. If you stop for 5 minutes....it logs 5 minutes. You have to realize that the paper logs were made to show quarter hours years before an E-log was every thought up. On a paper log you can quite easily "give" yourself those extra minutes......but....you have to do a lot of stopping to gain 60 minutes of extra drive time.....so just what exactly could you be saving as far as time goes?

E-log logs every thing done over 5 mph, exactly as it is done. It also snags any driving time that was done under 5mph, off of your "11 hour" drive time. So.....while you may be able to move a truck around a lot or facility without showing movement of the truck (under 7/10ths of a mile), if you do not get a full 8 hour sleeper berth period in, or a full 10 hour break in, before driving again, E-log takes that "lot movement" off your driving time, without showing that you physically moved the truck.

One thing to also know. If you move the truck while logged in the sleeper berth, the E-log can change the color of the graph line, from blue or brown to red or black. It might just place a dot on the graph....but that dot is a different color than the rest of the line.....and an attentive officer can catch that.

One other thing it does do, is record engine idle time.

DOT officers know all of this.

Does that mean a dot cop can write you a ticket for a false log if you move while logged as sleeper berth or for idling in a non-idle state?

For me, it is all about your individual rights. That is OOIDA's main concern also. I always have and always will say the government is sticking their nose where it doesn't belong in this and many other areas. As long as I or anyone else is driving safely, they should just leave us alone. Many companies have gone to EOBR's to keep the government off their back, not because of safety problems. It is a compliance tool, not a safety tool. There are many drivers driving tired instead of resting when they need to just to stay compliant.

I talked to the manager of a 100 truck company nearby that told me exactly that. They have had a very good safety record all along. The only reason they went to EOBR's was to avoid fines if they got audited. He also said it made a very significant drop in their profits when they switched because they couldn't haul near as many loads as before. I spoke with one of their drivers that has been there several years without any tickets. He said his personal income dropped 30% when they switched.

As with everything else concerning the government, they will probably get away with it because most people just sit back and do nothing but whine about it.

Someone will figure out a way to change the records without leaving tracks. It would be illegal, but since when does that stop anyone from doing anything?

As a guy who does paper logs I do use the grab 10 minutes driving time technique on occasion but a couple of things. First of all, they wrote the rules, not me, and if I follow the rules to the letter and round off, I'm doing exactly what they want me to do. Secondly, grabbing 10 minutes here and there with that technique does mean taking breaks more often. Short little 5 minutes breaks, but breaks nonetheless. I'll stretch my legs or make some coffee, something that gets me out of the drivers seat. More breaks = more alertness for a longer period of time.

Has anyone noticed that more people are becoming fearful of our government? I have noticed a trend for at least the last couple of years where as the government pushes for more regulations and laws to control the people that more are becoming fearful of the government that is supposed to protect our rights.

I would clarify that by saying that Americans are fearful of big government and the people that are making it bigger. They are getting a a lot bolder about taking away our rights. They shoved obama-care down our throats when the majority of Americans were and still are against it. Hopefully we will throw it right back in their face and throw a lot more of those bums out next year.

If a DOT officer wanted to nit pick, yes they could write you for log falsification for moving the truck while in sleeper berth. After all.....if you are logged in the sleeper....you shouldn't be moving the truck. If someone is going to get upset, it will be your safety department.

No....they can't write you for idling in a "no idle" state. If the Fed's cared whether or not the truck idled, they would not have a regulation governing your heating and a/c system.....which by federal law must work properly to protect the health of the driver(s).

Just as long as you're not sleeping, that is. Apparently our health doesn't matter when we're supposed to be getting our mandated sleeper time.

The right to break the law doesn't exist.

The fact is that the industry got into the EOBR to do several things, getting rid of the hassles of the whole log department is just one of them. Limiting the liabilities of having one of their drivers involved in a incident whether their fault or not when the driver is not supposed to be driving is another. When used in conjunction with other software, it allows the trucking company to bill for loads as soon as the BOL are scanned into a computer.

It's also a profit and legal protection tool..

This is a bad thing to you?

I think both of them are all wet.. again, there is no applied freebie to make more money because the work is being done illegally. The real problem is when something goes wrong.. not when getting caught doing something right.

And there are a lot of people who were reticent to use the systems and even hostile to them once they use the electronic systems would never choose to go back to the old paper systems. The electronic systems work both ways, you can say that they keep you from making extra money bu running illegally, but it also protects the drivers from the companies who require the drivers to run illegally.. If a company cannot survive unless their employees break the law.. why should they be in business in the first place?

I'm well versed in the operation of the GPS based electronic systems on both ends.. It's impossible to remove yourself or the truck from the planet. Any disappearing acts are easily seen.

I guess you can say that because you have never made a phone call while driving, hauled an overweight load, drove your truck when you knew something was broke, or broke the speed limit.

The government doesn't have the right to make laws that take our rights away from us. That is what the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights is all about.



If a company wants to use it, that's fine. That has nothing to do with the government forcing people to use it.


Yes, when the fines you are trying to avoid are caused by the government meddling where they shouldn't.

I have talked to dozens of their drivers since I started driving in 1978. One driver that worked there a couple years is a friend of mine that I have known for over 30 years. Their safety guy for the last 5 or 6 years is a retired state policeman that I have known since I was a teenager. I don't care what you think.

The problem is government interference. It has nothing to do with suviving. The government doesn't need to stick their nose in just because a driver is too lazy take care of himself. I have quit places that I didn't like, they can too.

I wouldn't say I am well versed, but I do know how to kill the gps signal on a qualcom when a company tries to use it against me. I was an O/O then, and I was not going to let them tell me how to drive my truck.


If you like something, fine, just don't try to cram it down my throat.

Wow.. the bill of rights and the Constitution! Well yankee doodley doo to you.. Allowing drivers and companies to decide what rules and regulations that follow instantly makes the highways safer.. (sarcasm off).

You are being sarcastic about the very solution that would help keep our highways safe. For a long time I have been for some type of exemption card that a driver could earn by having 5 or so years of safe driving. Any ticket would cause you to have it suspended or revoked. If a driver would have the determination to drive safely to earn it, he would continue to do so to keep it.

As far as scoffing at the Constitution; :thumbsdown:

I wasn't scoffing at the Constitution, I was scoffing at you for minimizing it and using it as a chamberpot to further some half-witted position. You remind me a lot of Larry Flint and the Westboro people.. you have that right to speak as they do.. you just lack the personal responsibility to use the rights guaranteed to you for what they were actually meant for.. I don't waste my time with cocksure idiots anymore.. good luck with those windmills..

For you to think I am misusing the Constitution makes it appear that you want to pick and choose who gets rights.. I don't know much about Larry Flint, but I say the Supreme court got it wrong about the Westboro people. They do not have the right to abuse other peoples rights. My boy very nearly came home in a box. I would not just stand by while they abuse my family.

I hold the same basic position as OOIDA. If you want to call the position of tens of thousands of drivers half-witted that is your right. I spoke with them before sending in my comment on the hours of service. I will probably talk to them before i send in my comment about eobr's.

If you beleive that someone lacks personal responsibility for working to keep this country the way its founders wanted it to stay, that is your right also. This eobr situation is just a minor thing compared to the many other challenges our country is facing.

There are far too many people in positions of power that are trying to twist the constitution to serve their purpose. It is NOT a living document. The founders wrote it so that no matter how society changed, it could still guide the country down the path that would keep our country great.

As far as the exemption card I spoke of, or any system that would encourage safety, I know it will never be considered until the people in charge are more concerned with safety than control.

See.......Now this is where I disagree with you. There are plenty of trucking companies out there, that would abuse the hell out of something like what I think you are suggesting. An "exemption" that would allow a driver to drive, just because said driver felt it was "safe" to drive. There have always been "Cowboys" in this industry. Those "Cowboys" are why this industry has the reputation that it currently enjoys.

I saw where you say that you started driving in 1978. So............given your attitude on this subject....I can only assume you are one of those "Cowboys" that feel driving 20 hours of a 24 hour day is perfectly safe...........just because your eyes are open.

I started driving in 1979...."Professionally". I drove my first truck in 1973. I have seen plenty of people killed over the years. Not just by 18-wheelers...but by all modes of highway transportation. I think trading 1 hour of drive time for one less hour of the work day...was a fair trade (remember....10 and 15 became 11 and 14??)

I don't think someone saying "I am safe because I can handle it" is safe. Not in anyway shape or form. There have been drivers, that I have known over the years, whom should not have been allowed to drive after 8 hours.......let alone 10. There have been plenty also, whom should have never been allowed behind the wheel of a truck. When I voiced my opinion of some of those drivers........I was called bigoted and "churlish".


Having EOBR's on trucks...while it may invade the privacy of the driver, when it comes to seeing that the driver is comitting an illegal act.....that type of driver is exactly why all these "Anti-truck" groups are getting their way....Those drivers and their employers.

I am an "Owner Operator" and I like the Qualcomm. The Qualcomm backed me up several times over the last 20 months. When a manager and a dispatcher tried to say I didn't inform them of my HOS limitations (a load that was forced on me, even though I had informed them, via Qualcomm, that I did not have HOS to make the delivery, was delayed while I did a reset 200 miles from the receiving customer)....it was all right there on the Qualcomm. When I got shafted on a very high revenue load....it was all right there on the Qualcomm...and I got the money I was shafted out of....once in 2009, and 4 times in 2010. A total sum of $10,800 was paid to me, based on the information that the Qualcomm contained (the company paid me 50% of the linehaul on those 5 loads, that I did not haul).
It comes in handy when dispatchers are stupid. When managers are stupid. If the driver is stupid as well....to bad for the driver. The driver knows that the EOBR is there. Some folks have to be forced to "Play safe". And that is to bad.

Giving people a free hand to "Be Stupid".............just isn't a good idea. Bad drivers have affected us all for years.........................and it continues.

I agree that some will try to abuse anything. I just gave a basic I idea that I have heard variations of such as the card could allow Alaskan hours etc. I think there should be safeguards of some kind in place if anything like that would ever be considered.

You might give me a label, but my safety record should count for something. I have 3 million miles without a logbook ticket. I have never gotten one and I have been DOT'd 6 or 7 times in just the past year. I had one companies safety guy give my log sheets to an auditor when he asked for 2 more drivers sheets to finish up because he knew mine would be good. The safety guy told me this. I haven't had any tickets of any kind for over 20 years. The only accidents I have had was backing and that was 20 some years ago also. I have hit 3 deer with little to no damage each time, but I don't count that against anyone.

I am one of the slowpokes in construction, school, etc zones. I always have traffic backed up if there is only one lane open for very far. I will drive the speed limit. Everyone else wants to keep the pedal on the floor.

I am also a stickler on load securement. I have been complimented on my securement on different occasions. Right now I have 3 coils/31,000 lbs secured with six chains.

I started this thread to get information so I could write an informed letter instead of a ranting letter like some do. I end up getting attacked by someone that doesn't like my strong stance for this country and what it stands for. That is why I rarely have my cb on. I get tired of all the crap.

I will still listen if anyone has something substantial to say in answer to my question. I appreciate all the contributions to my question so far.

Again, there is no right to break the law. Secondly the 1st amendment was upheld by the supreme court they got that correct as sad as that is. I can tell you from experience that you would indeed stand by while the westboro goons did what they sometimes do. You’re pretty busy during that time with other things.
So the founding fathers were concerned about 80,000 pound trucks running with fatigued drivers as they drove whenever they wanted too? Really?
It damn well better be a living document or we better get rid of the standing army and limit ourselves to a Navy because that all the Constitution really allows.
It would never be considered because it’s an asinine, self-serving and dangerous idea.

No you didn't, You came here to get information (that you know little to nothing about) to bolster your already biased and negative opinion of the electronic recording devices. Here is the FIRST sentence that you posted; "I am gathering information for my letter to the fmcsa concerning mandatory eobr's. I have never used one and never want to. I would like to hear all possible ways that you can cheat while using them.

Attacked? Hardly.. someone took an opposing position to your obviously biased and uninformed position and you got all butthurt and started yapping about your "experience" in everything with the exception of the current topic (which you came here looking for ONLY negative information on). You then launched into something about the founding fathers and the constitution BOTH which are irrelevant to the discussion.

I've explained that there really is no way to cheat the system without EASILY being caught. The worst thing about the EOBR's is that the drivers have to KNOW that they are dealing with a very litteral system that records every second of their on-duty time and their driving status. The system uses the ECM, and a GPS that works together, this information is stored in an electronic "basket" in the CPU of the truck.. at timed, predetermined intervals, when the driver "forces" a data call or when the truck passes the nearest cell antenna, the truck dumps the stored information on the the network which is then forwarded to the providers and then the company. I have lined out why it is a good that some companies are forced to use them. why others would want to.. and why still others have gone into these systems for pure economic survival.

I'm glad this thread is here. I was wondering what EOBR's were. I've heard them talk about it on Road Dog. I figured it was paperless logs, but wasn't completely sure. We have computers in our trucks. Not bad. I kinda like them. The good thing about them; you don't have to work the crossword puzzle book. The bad thing about them; they know exactly what you are doing. They can pin point us to exactly where we're at. :lol:

I think that we should just get rid of the log books, EOBR's and the hos. When you get tired you find a place to park and take a nap. That is what every other profession does, with the possible exception of pilots.

Yeah...That would be a fine and lovely thing. BUT.....what are you going to do with all those drivers....AND OWNERS....who think that a person can stay awake for 40 odd hours....and still safely drive a truck.

You were around for the days when drivers were given a bag of pills to keep them running so the "loads" could be moved. THOSE DAYS are exactly why HOS and log books were required in the first place. Those days are why truck inspections were developed...because the people whom were charged with keeping the equipment safe...(drivers and owners...owners and drivers)....wouldn't do that....not if it cost money. The EOBR's that are being shoved down peoples throats........those are coming because of the intelligent folks that have been able to hide their operational activities............right up until they killed someone.

First I want to apologize to everyone for letting someone goad me into hijacking my own thread. I usually do some background checking when someone starts getting disagreeable, but I didn't this time. Some of the illogical things said in the last two rants is what woke me up. I will ignore any further posts by him.

I would like to clarify a couple things before trying to get back on track.

I would not wish those westboro jerks on anyone and I wouldn't fault anyone for how they decided to handle that situation. Because there are so many variables I won't even try to give any detailed explanations, but if I had to deal with them I would discuss all possible solutions with the funeral director and the law enforcement that would be involved. If the only possible solution would be to have no service at all, I would choose that over a service desecrated by those ungodly and immoral people. As I said I will not stand by and let my family be abused.

The "exemption card" idea ( I'm open to a better name if anyone has one) is based on the probationary teenager license that some states use, the insurance reward program for teens, as well as the probationary cdl that has been discussed. The first two programs mentioned are showing positive results so taking it one step further and rewarding drivers in some fashion for safe driving habits should be worth a try. Propane and anhydrous haulers get exemptions from the hos during busy times and they are hauling hazardous.


Most everyone has said that there isn't much you can do with line 3, which is really what I suspected. I will rephrase my question to ask about the other three lines. What flaws in the system has anyone experienced or noticed. For example, when you are backed into a dock for 6 hours getting loaded, the government says that is all supposed to be on line 4. From the many people I have spoken with in the past that are using e-logs, hardly any of them put that time on line 4. I would like to hear any other area or instances concerning lines 1, 2, and 4

I remember those days, Stan. It was a much different time and attitude. The EOBR's and change of hos will do little or nothing to change those who continue to operate by the seat of their pants. It is a shame to punish an entire industry for the sins of the few. No amount of regulations will force those who want to break the rules to change their ways. The government will never be able to make everyone safe and secure. You cannot legislate safety. I understand what you are saying. It could force some who constantly push the envelope to make some changes. But, there will always be those who break the rules. It would be interesting to do a study and see if getting rid of the hos and logs actually would make a difference in how most operate.

Same attitude is very alive and well in the industry, it was calmed down immensly with the radom drug tests.
The new HOS and the EOBR have changed a lot of things and a lot of companies to their very core. I still cannot understand what the "punishment" is supposed to be.
It already has changed many things.
No.. and the other is certainly debatable, there are many many instances where legislation (just seatbelt laws as a single example) have improved safety in the industry.
There will be, but eventually, with any luck, it will stop being the norm and the industry as a whole can be seen as an honest profession and not have 100's of precentages of turnover per year.
Who's going to pay up when the accidents start taking lives? There have been many times that the government has used segments of the population as guinea pigs.. why should this one be any different?

At one time this was a very respected profession. I suppose that we could debate the cause of the change in attitude, whether it is society or those in the industry that have caused the change in attitude.

One change that I would like to see is for the government or those who want all the new changes to prove that the sought after changes would be beneficial to the industry. For instance, those who want to force ALL who own class 8 trucks to go to the expense of EOBR's should have to do a controlled study that would prove that they would make the roads safer and would justify the cost of installation. If they cannot prove the need then the legislation should go away. Personally, I don't think that a study about the EOBR's would prove that they will make roads safer, but they will make a few people who have invested in the technology very rich.

I would think that doing a study on the hos would also be beneficial. They keep changing our hos but have yet to demonstrate how roads are being made safer with those changes. The lack of a provision for taking a rest break without impacting your work day is one example of people making rules about things in which they have no knowledge. It just sounded like a good idea at the time. When major changes are made in the hos then it costs this industry millions of dollars. Compliance is one of the major costs of being in this business.

I think that the EOBR have already proven their effectiveness in all sorts of ways. Personally this is more about regaining control of an industry that has bankrolled itself on the old world trucker macho myth that somehow their health and well being is less important than their pocketbooks. This industry for too long has profited off of the free work of the drivers who has made them billions of dollars while running all of the profit out of the business for those who do all of the work. The reason that all of the pay is gone is based on the fact that companies who paid a fair wage for all work done by drivers can not compete with the morons who will go out and work and drive for FREE. With mandated EOBR's across the board, that is instantly reduced to those who are going to break the law AND since the next obvious step is the electronic based reporting that results (already in place in several companies) they will not be in business very long. It's well past time to give up trusting the companies and the drivers to follow the rules, the blood bath of companies and drivers slitting each others throats has left this job to the dregs more and more every year. There is a reason that the turnover in the industry is so high and that's because people instantly become part of the nudge nudge wink wink machine.

The hours of service studies have been done and done and done again at the request of the DRIVERS who felt that they were powerless to fight their companies and the shippers and receivers who never seemed to bother with the drivers needs as it related to their fatigue levels or delay times. THEY asked the feds in.. now of course like the abused spouse who has called 9/11 after years of abuse.. its the mean old cop's fault for daring to question their sweetie pie.. The control has to come from outside because self control and professionalism sure isn't coming from within.

I don't believe that the EOBR's have proven their value other than possibly saving carriers who use them, money in compliance costs. It would probably cost less to check logs electronically than to do it manually as it is done with most carriers. I don't know of any studies that provide any evidence that those who use EOBR's are any safer than those who use paper logs. I can see a cost benefit to major carriers. I am not sure the same benefits would apply to smaller carriers such as myself.

My objection to EOBR's are mainly the unknown cost/benefit and that it is yet another control that the government wants over my business. The current bill making it's way through congress is nothing more than a means to limit competition. I have more than 4 million safe miles behind me. I must be doing something right. There are many others who have done the same.

I know that there may be those who still run 2 or 3 logbooks. There are apparently still some who take drugs and drive. There will always be those who think that the rules apply to everyone but themselves. The majority of safe drivers should not be forced to pay the price for the small percentage of those who regularly break the rules.

I still fail to understand why some in this business seem to want to run for fuel money. I don't understand why some feel that the only way to gain market share is to undercut the competition. I have been in this business for many years. I have also owned other companies and have NEVER tried to get business by cutting prices in any business that I have owned. I think that if a cheap price is all you can offer that you don't have much to sell. It seems to me that the ones who are pushing this legislation are the ones who will cut their competitors throat to get the business. It can be frustrating when in an area and there is someone who will take a load for $0.70 just to have something on the truck. I refuse to put anything on the truck that will not make at least some profit for me. I don't see the EOBR's or any other regulations changing the attitude of these people. It is sort of like gun control. The only people who are affected by gun controls are law abiding citizens. The criminals will always find a way to get guns. It is the same in this industry. As much as I would like to believe otherwise, I don't see any of these added controls stopping all the dregs.

Orangetxguy,

I didn't give a specific example in my previous post, but since I already sidetracked this thread, I will, to get your opinion.

A new driver would get a probationary cdl for a period of time to prove they can operate safely. After receiving your regular cdl, if you received no tickets for 5 years you could get an endorsement on your cdl that would allow you to run Alaskan hours. If you don't want to work that hard, you don't have to get the card. It would be a graduated system where the driver would have to safely work toward the next step only if he wanted to. That would prevent companies from pushing some drivers harder than they can safely work.

I am open to variations of the details, but this would address one problem that many people have with the hos. One size doesn't fit everyone.

Another example of a similar program already in place is the hazmat endorsement. If you don't have it, a company can't make you haul a hazmat load.

An endorsement on your cdl would make it simple to implement and enforce a penalty system if you do something unsafe after earning it.

Under the present system, many companies choose to use rookies because they can pay them less. Under this system, companies would have an incentive to use experienced, safe drivers that would allow them to get the same amount of freight moved with less trucks. There would be a lot less drivers with the endorsement which would encourage companies to pay more, which would give rookies a reason to drive safer and get the exemption if they wanted to.
As I said, I am open to many variations.

I don't know of any carrier who will force a driver to haul a hazmat load unless they have a hazmat endorsement on their license. The risks are much too high for both the carrier and driver if he is caught. However, carriers can require drivers to have a hazmat before they will hire them.

Exactly my point.

P.S. I added more info above while you were typing this.

It was a ludicrous example.. The fact remains that truck drivers (no matter how tough they think they are) are still human beings. Numerous studies have shown the effects of sleep debt on performance studies. Those who are willing to take chances with other people's lives don't care about the research or the facts and that will never change.

I'm pretty sure that last post was aimed at me, but he quoted GMAN. :confused:

Only 13 posts in the last 5 months, and then in the past week, about 1 per day aimed at me. If I was the suspicious type, I might think this guy really doesn't like me.

Seriously though, in the example I gave, I am just coordinating programs that are legal and already in place in the US.

The part apart Qualcomm backing you up several times... That sounds like working smarter, not harder to me. :thumbsup:

Why is it that truck drivers are bound and determined to defend their right to work 14 hours for 8 or 10 hours pay? Reducing the hours we can work to 13 won't take an hour's pay out of our wallets, we'll just have to work 1 less hour for the same money.

I rarely sleep more than 5-6 hours. I never use an alarm because I have an internal clock that will wake me after 5-6 hours. I have tried to sleep longer, but if I sleep for 8 hours then I feel groogy all day. It is like I have a giant hangover. I understand that there are some people who need 8 hours or more sleep to function. My wife is one of them. That is why we should allow drivers to sleep when they are tired and work when they feel rested. Sleep deprivation or debt can be a problem. Of course, the real problem is that everyone has a different clock. In my case, I would be more dangerous and less alert on the highway if I were forced to get 8 hours or more of sleep. Someone such as my wife would be a hazard with only 5 hours of sleep. We all need a certain amount of sleep. Since the amount of rest is different with each individual, it makes little sense to have a fixed amount of time that a driver must rest to make the public safe.