Gordon gets cut back...
 

I was talking to my friend at GTI today and starting last monday they started turning their trucks back to 63mph. Not all will be done at once obviously, but over the next couple months all the gordon trucks will be running slower. That's fine with me because it means I can pass another company on the road! Now I'm sorta glad that I didn't go back to GTI. I know it's only 2mph less, but 65 is as slow as I want to be governed.

Chris

One reason GTI is slowing their trucks down is because it is costing them $25 million more this year for fuel from a year ago.

what people seem to fail to realize is that these big companies turning the trucks down is an effort to save drivers jobs. that two or three mph on all trucks could be a big chunk of change for the entire company. and if two or three mph loses a driver that much money then he/she is not doing a good job in the first place.

3mph times 10 hours per day = 30 miles
times 50 hours on duty/driving per week =150 miles less per weekdriven
times 52 weeks = 7800 less miles driven per year
times 32 cpm =$2496 less pay per year doing the same work
that's $208 less per month you'll get paid.
I don't know about you but my expenses won't allow a reduction of $200 per month, "gee honey, what can we do without, heat or food?"

Are you willing to take a $1 per hour cut in pay? is everybody in the company getting a similar (about 5%) cut or is it just the drivers? will it make the company go out of business if you don't?

Yes fuel is out of sight but the drivers shouldn't have to subsidise the companies lack of management.

AMEN to that.

But hey they are just saving your job. :roll:

Seems like everyone is turning down. Swift goin down to 63, Gordon goin down to 63, my friend at florilli is getting turned down from 68 to 65.

How do slowing 2 or 3 mph translate in "he/she is not doing a good job in the first place"?

I also disagree about companies effort to "save drivers jobs". Companies number goal is to make money not friends. I personally hope all companies that haul cheap freight and pay there drivers low wages go out of business. And I also hope the government stop subsidizing trucking schools and new drivers to get in the business and stop the never ending cycle. I don't believe tax payers shouldn't be flipping the bill for trucking companies that shouldn't be in business.

I gotta play devils advocate here. Your numbers are assuming you are always moving 10 hours a day, 5 days a week and always at your maximum speed regardless of speed limits. I just don't see it.

Management absolutely should also take some kind of pay cut as a sign of support for the drivers.

I could not agree with you more!

[quote="marylandkwI gotta play devils advocate here. Your numbers are assuming you are always moving 10 hours a day, 5 days a week and always at your maximum speed regardless of speed limits. I just don't see it.[/quote]


I agree, these numbers are examples and yours may vary, I tried to use averages, the 30 miles per day are based on reducing your speed 3mph (at any speed) some drivers average more than 50 hours driving per week, most of us take time off and many make more than 32cpm.

If you have a dedicated I5 route your carrier could reduce their trucks to 58 (60 in WA) mph and no driver could rightly complain.
Unless they want to admit to speeding. :wink:

I found out last night that Interstate is getting cut back too but only the Solo's and not the teams.

wrong.... the word is, they are looking at idle %. those that idle over 30% will be cut back to 65 mph. Dont know where you got your info, I got mine from the office upstairs. Been trying to keep my Idle below 20%.

maybe just me but you could lose 200 a month, or 1100. which is better? or you could go look for another job instead of complaining about 3 mph...but wait that would take some effort wouldn't it? nevermind.

I can understand why companies are doing in with Diesel at $4/gal.

Figure it will cost the typical solo driver $1500 year in reduced earnings while saving the company at least twice that in less fuel burnt. They need to kick back that savings to the driver. Every company should have an obtainable, realistic MPG bonus that is big enough to make the drivers care. Most of us could eek out an extra .3-.5 mpg if we really cared.

Now if they coupled it with a .01-.02 cpm hike it would be a wash.

GTI
 

They are also going to park 100 trks.

Hmm, some drivers are their own worst enemy!

Not sure about Gordon, Interstate, or some of these others, but 2 of the outfits I have worked for with 65 and 68 mph trucks, gave the drivers one heck of a fuel bonus if their mpg averages were above a certain attainable level! Speed, shifting, trip planning and idling are all factors!

Even when my truck were governed, I very seldom ran on the governor! Also, unless temperatures were between 40 and 80 degrees, my truck was shut down when I was asleep! Had a nice quiet 12 volt fan to keep the air moving in the truck, and slept like a baby! When the fuel bonus' came out, it far outweighed the measly loss of revenue because of miles not driven. My current company truck will run 85 mph, my average speed to date on all runs this year, has been 58 mph, and my fuel mileage is up almost 1.5 mpg over the previous driver!

I do know to many drivers that can average much over 58 mph anyway, in OTR work, and most, if they run a legal log book, will find the average speed per shift is closer to 53 or 54!

So the loss of revenue argument does not hold up, when it comes back to companies cutting back the trucks to 62, 63, 0r 65. What they save in fuel, maintenance and insurance can save a outfit a huge chunk of change, that can be passed on to drivers that take care of the equipment!

Too many company drivers have the crap attitude, that it is not my equipment, it is not my money, so why try and save it! When if they would take care of it as if it was theirs, they would see huge rewards in most cases, and prepare them for the ultimate step, of being a O/O!

If I was running a fleet, you can darn sure bet, the drivers that took care of my equipment and looked after expenses like it was their own, would be rewarded, either monetarily, or with the cream of the pick when it came to loads.


Think about it! Want to be your own worst enemy, keep thinking that way! Want to earn the rewards, and prepare yourself for the future, take care of the equipment, plan your runs better, and quit your whinin!

This is definitely a touchy subject. One possibility to look at is with diesel being what it is, the companies could be using this reduction as an excuse to clear record breaking earnings. Or perhaps they have too many accident drivers and the insurance is raising their rates unless a "safety measure" is taken. All in all, to find the absolute true reason(s) behind it is nearly an impossible task.

Definitely agree! A company in all reality does not have to justify its actions to the drivers! But in many cases, would really help the drivers understand what is going on!

I just find it funny how many company drivers have know idea about what keeps those wheels rolling!

I am a true believer that company orientation should include a minimum of 4 hours in trucking economics!

No doubt, there will be plenty of flame action on this one! Oh well!

Ready? My old trainers student's parents drive team for interstate. Thats where I got my info from. :oops:

A lot of the turning down is brought on by the drivers who treat the companies truck as an endless money pit. We were at the terminal the other day, a solo driver pulled up (had a back of seat organizer in passenger seat w/big box so we know he was a solo), temp was 68 with a breeze. He got out of his truck, left it running and walked into the building. The trucks have automatic shutoff, but it can take up to 5 minutes to shut off. That is five minutes to long! It is hard to fathom that this driver was so lazy that he cannot even turn a key off. Pleazzzzzze! :roll:

Many of the drivers out there whining and crying have no one to blame but themselves and they need to go into the bathroom, look into the mirror and cry to themselves for I don't give a darn.

As long as I have a job during this recession/turn down in the economy/government/big business screwing this country over (call it what you want) I will be happy. 55 mph or 68 mph I will get my job done and my bills paid.

thats how rumors get started, drivers talking instead of asking.

But who really knows? I could have been lied to, but don't thing so.

No one in the freight biz is having record earnings right now. Well, perhaps the railroads but that is another story.

Between the economy slowing and all the extra equipment that was bought to avoid the 07 emissions standards rates are in the basement right now.

I'm not surprised to hear GTI, and others governing their trucks as a means to cut costs, and improve safety. I would be surprised to hear that it actually achieved this because it doesn't. To me it is more an indication that their routes, loads, customers, and utilization allow for the slower speeds because it is not needed to accomplish the task.

The Trucker news has repeatedly reported the ATA's (companies, etc) efforts to mandate speed governors supposedly for safety, and fuel consumption. The reports further use the 0.1 mpg loss over 55 mph as one of the reasons. This same newspaper in an article stated the study is not accurate. My own experience tells me it isn't accurate.

I have driven trucks governed at 65 mph (turned down) and at 70 mph (not turned down) in 55-75 mph states, and have been both safer and had better fuel mileage in the 70 mph truck.

Try passing another truck at 65 mph when they're going maybe 62 mph on a four lane highway, have another vehicle pull out in front of them, and tell me this is safe because I'm governed at 65 or any other speed. If I had the extra acceleration I could clear the lane, and give them an out. Or try passing a vehicle that change speeds while passing on a two lane road, and enjoy the safety of governing. The driver is the one in charge of operating the vehicle safely, and is the one able to operate it in a manner that improves fuel mileage. Having a company reduce the truck isn't the solution. Hiring "professional" drivers is.

I am so tired of hearing trucking companies, their owner operators, independents, and drivers complain about the cost of fuel when it is an utterly meaningless number other than for calculations. Price volatility is the problem as it doesn't matter if fuel is $0.99 or $15 a gallon. The cost can be offset by fuel surcharges or in the freight rate. It merely causes the rate to increase/decrease, and increase/decrease the amount of debt carried till payment. Volatility is the problem, but that's only because of rising fuel prices. Have you ever heard anyone complaining when the price decreases during a trip or of a company reimbursing a customer for the overcharge?

I'm not sure why this is not understood but......Companies don't pay for anything (taxes, etc), the customer does.

RottsATruckin is merely making the point that it will be a loss of revenue to the drivers. Anyone think the companies will up the driver pay by an offsetting amount? Btw, fuel bonuses as compensation are not a valid way of doing so either unless all of the drivers were using the same equipment, route, loads, weather, etc. A wide enough spread would have to be used to make it fair which would then make it meaningless.

With todays technology if you made it load, equipment and route specific it could work. Ever company OTR truck already has GPS tracking and the ability to monitor fuel consumption via the ECU. Most carriers have one or a handful of standard spec's on the equipment.

I just pulled equipment and #s out of thin air as a hypothetical.

You could have a database that says" With a VN670 and 25k in the box you should get between 5.8 and 6.4 going between Reno and Salt Lake City on I80"
Now pulling the same load with the same truck from Sacramento to Reno over Donner you would be lucky to get 4.5mpg.

Companies do seem to order similar equipment spec'd roughly the same, and with large enough databases I can see a range created as suggested.

I'm trying to suppress the traumatic flashbacks that statistics class has caused, but someone immune to the evils of statistical analysis could make an interesting fuel bonus program. Assuming that the different systems (GPS, route/load history, weather, equipment) could be integrated to make this automated so that a valid result could be obtained without much effort, I would be all for it.

I just don't think it'll happen because in the end I think it'll be viewed as an additional cost (despite it providing a savings and a way to reward desired driving habits). Let's be honest, it has taken $3-4 a gallon diesel prices for aerodynamic tractor models, apu's, etc to become widely purchased despite their always providing a savings (albeit less or a longer payback period). I'm just not sure what it would take for this to be worth it to the industry.

I like the idea, and can see other uses (hiring, retention, etc) for the info it would provide. Thanks for the good input Ian Williams.

[quote="Ian WilliamsYou could have a database that says" With a VN670 and 25k in the box you should get between 5.8 and 6.4 going between Reno and Salt Lake City on I80"
Now pulling the same load with the same truck from Sacramento to Reno over Donner you would be lucky to get 4.5mpg.[/quote]

And you can forget about any data on flatbeds being consistent, my mileage varied from 3.9-7 mpg depending on the profile of the load not it's weight or speed it traveled down the road.
I could pull 20K worth of farm implements and be stopping early for fuel the whole trip, put on 45K of lumber nicely tarped and I could skip some stops.
When I went to flats my fuel bonus was based on where I got fuel not how much I put on.

The company I am working for is in the process of considering turning their trucks down to 60 mph (from 65 now). It may only be to 62-63, but we'll see. It's their truck so whatever speed they want it driven at it will be. But a company does not need to turn them down. As a "professional" driver I am capable of understanding and adhering to the rules of the job (Federal, State, Company). They could provide a 100+ mph truck and it'd still be driven at 60 if instructed to do so.

I guess this goes to show how many "professional" drivers they employ or what they think of their drivers. Either way it reflects poorly on the industry to me.

Flaming? Not from me . .
 

. . this is without question the most insightful post I have ever seen on this site. It's brilliant!

I was beginning to think I was the only one who was more interested in my pay than what the company gets paid.

Company Drivers . . do you really care about the price of fuel? Rubber? Cement? Steel? Insurance? Tolls?

Do you understand the meaning of minimum wage and how it relates to you? Minimum wage means "If I could pay you less, I would." If you drive for cents per mile you are driving for minimum wage. Do you get it?

The trucks have automatic shutoff, but it can take up to 5 minutes to shut off. That is five minutes to long! It is hard to fathom that this driver was so lazy that he cannot even turn a key off. Pleazzzzzze! :roll:

leave that key on as turbo needs to cool 3-5 minutes so it wont cook in its own juices pleez

The Trucker news has repeatedly reported the ATA's (companies, etc) efforts to mandate speed governors supposedly for safety, and fuel consumption.

Our company says shut them down whenever exiting the truck. Not once have they ever said "leave it on to cool down the turbo and waste our fuel".

Just another driver trying to justify another dumbazz driver's actions who has his own interest in mine, not the price or fuel or the company that is for sure. Birds of a feather flock together, that is for sure.

Allowing the turbo to cool off isn't a dumb thing. A turbo cost's far more than 1 or 2 gallns of fuel.

I own my truck. I shut my truck off at the fuel island, after filling out my logbook and writing down my location and mileage in a journal I keep. I do this to give the turbo a chance to cool off, as well as giving the heads the same cool down period.

If I am spotting to unload, and I know that I will immediately be using the truck's motor to either run the PTO driven pump, or provide air to "air off" a load, I do not shut the engine off. Constant shutdown and starting wears heavily on the starter and selinoid. I just spent $2350 replacing my starter....so I consider what I need to do, before I do it.

Flying W I can understand why you're behind the wheel and not in the front office........ some of the factors you aren't taking into consideration:

A. Many companies have contract rates for customers where fuel surcharges are already set.....an increase at the pumps isn't easy to pass on to the customer in that case. And, even though many companies buy at contract prices with suppliers, due to the record setting prices for crude, the futures are unpredictable.......the discounts previously enjoyed by the companies are quickly becoming a thing of the past.
B. Surcharges and increased rates have to be delicately balanced with current economic state ...... if you haven't realized it, we are in a recession. Companies are closing, lay offs are happening everyday, manufacturing is cutting shifts and production, because the consumer demand isn't there.........you, sitting behind the wheel out on the road, should be able to recognize the fact that there has been a drop in the flow of products across our highways. Manufacturers are looking to cut cost anywhere and everywhere they can to stave off force reductions.......that includes shipping rates......... trucking companies have to balance any rate increase very carefully or they can very easily price themselves right out of business.

Your assumptions that the increases can easily be passed on to the customer aren't in fact reality. Every driver (company drivers included) needs to do whatever they can to operate in the most economical fashion possible in these uncertain times of our economy. Remember, your driving career depends on the viability of the company to remain competitive during these lean times ......... the company doesn't exist for your employment.... you have a job only as long as the company remain viable.

With your logic that companies can pass everything onto the customer, I would strongly suggest that you may want to remain a company driver....... at least until you become more knowledgeable about the economics of running a business and making the necessary decision to stay afloat.

I suspect the driving reason for governing their trucks is two fold:
A. For economies derived from better milage........and
B. Because their insurance underwriter gives them better premium rates based on the lower speeds.

Both of which could very well be the difference between making it through this slow down or watching the auctioneer selling off their assets.

I suppose, based on many post on this thread and recent similar others, it should be easy to determine the difference between a steering wheel holder, a professional driver, and the owner operators!

Why many cannot understand, that although they work for a company, drive company equipment, and such, that they are very much part of the success or failure of that company!

Just another driver trying to justify another dumbazz driver's actions who has his own interest in mine, not the price or fuel or the company that is for sure. Birds of a feather flock together, that is for sure.[/quote]

ive owned a 160 hp ac farm tractor and a 90 hp international farm tractor.owners manuals for both recommended 3 minutes to idle /cool down.
now i drive an 07 mack and after you turn the key off it will idle for a long time till the computer determines from various sensors that the correct conditions for shut down exist. i avoid overriding the computer by turning the key off twice because i like to take care of the equipment as best i can. call me names all you want.

I'm not a mechanic so please don't beat me up over this, but two out three company shops told me that by the time we rolled down the off ramp, and got the truck parked that we could shut it down as the turbo would be cool enough by then. I say two out of three as I have serious doubts about the second one even having a shop considering the condition of the 48' steel flatbeds.

Lifesmullet, with your reading comprehension skills you might want to read this several times in the hopes of understanding it.

Your entire point A can be summed up in two words, hence the use of the words price volatility (I'll give you a minute to look up the definition of both words).

"Every driver (company drivers included) needs to do whatever they can to operate in the most economical fashion possible in these uncertain times of our economy. Remember, your driving career depends on the viability of the company to remain competitive during these lean times ."

The day I see Lifesmullet tell his company to cut his pay down to minimum wage, cram two other drivers into the truck and toss in a bucket so that it can continuously roll for lower operating costs and greater company viability (stopping only to fuel, load, or unload) is the day I'll listen to rubbish like that.

And you had to drag up a year old thread just to insult another board member?

And who is Lifesmullet?

I believe all trucks should be limited to 55mph. Save fuel, save lifes.

11 hours ave 50mph Times .28 cents per mile. = 154 dollars a day times 6 days a week = $924 per week times 45 weeks a year = 41,500 a year. Thats 7 weeks off plus 1 day a week off = 101 days off and 264 days worked. Beats flipping burgers and nobody gets in a hurry. Ahh Life is good.

What fantasy land you live in?

roflmao