WB I10 near Palm Springs 11 Dead Tour Bus versus Truck

Your comparison is more ridiculous than the point you're trying to make. If you can't see the difference between somebody INTENTIONALLY trying to kill someone and the CEO of a major corporation in a trade that is consistently on the list of "top 10 most dangerous jobs" hiring someone who someday finds themselves in an unfortunate incident, then you aren't worth my time trying to explain it.

 

Sorry again for interrupting with the topic of this thread. Apparently the driver of the bus was involved in another fatal accident, although it seems that accident was due to the fault of the other driver. But he wasn't perfect.

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-ln-bus-crash-owner-20161024-snap-story.html

Back to the hijack...

 

Jason L Burgoyne ·
Driver at Usher Land & Timber
I used to train for swift.....though I no longer work or care for the company,i have 20+ years behind a truck wheel accident FREE,you can't base drivers on the company they work for that's just ########,i see a lot of you other "drivers"doing stupid #### too,but swift is BIG they have a lot of trucks and ####TY hiring practices......blame the NTSB,the DOT and REALLY ####ty rates they keep putting dumber and dumber drivers behind the wheel...

Now this is someone I don't know from Adam, telling you exactly my point that they put money in front of peoples safety.

 

The only reason you hate "megas" is because they are an easy target. They have that name branding and truck uniformity that is so easily recognized. The crashes that maim and kill caused by or involving non "megas" are immediately memory holed into oblivion because the following:

confirmation bias - they dont fit your prejudicial notion that the big companies are the only ones with ####ty drivers.

I could post decades of articles and pictures of horrific crashes, fires, lines of trucks on their sides and more. All of them involving non big fleet trucks. What is the point though because like the saying goes.

You cannot use logic to dissuade someone from a position they did not use logic to arrive at.

Have fun being angry at life.

 

Would seem his stellar safety record is somewhat tarnished now.

 

We all put money in front of people's lives. If we lowered the national speed limit to 10 mph we would reduce traffic deaths to almost zero but that would be so impractical that it would not be worth it to drive.

Do you spend money on things you don't need? Well, if you had donated that money you could have saved some poor African child. Everyone puts money ahead of lives to an extent. An argument could be made that if truckers were paid, say 100k a year average, that the resulting increase in costs to consumers could cost people their lives.

 

That's not the same as willfully and knowingly handing a set of keys to some clown that you know is not qualified to pilot a big truck. That is willful negligence. You are talking about calculated risk. There is a black and white difference between calculated risk and willful negligence.
When one of these j/a impacts ( literally ) your lives, we will see what you say then. Or maybe you think it won't happen to you. Maybe when the guys telling you " We think we can save your legs, but were not sure", well its too late then.
It's not combat. It's a F job, and the mega's do nothing more than endanger peoples welfare flooding the industry with clowns. When someone who thinks their ### is made from fuzz, is held accountable for some hard time, the hiring and training practices will change.
It's about accountability.

And your post about sending the money I use to play poker with to Africa makes absolutely no sense whatsoever in context of this discussion.
If it's some weird form of guilt trip, The Lord said " The poor you will always have with you. I am here for but a short time." He told that to Judas when Judas was whining about the perfume used to clean his hair.

 

So how many of those 56 fatalities were Swift's fault, vs Swift just being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

Makes a huge difference when you're trying to use the statistic as a reason to justify your position.

 

You tell me, your the one defending them with such zeal. You have all there company info on another thread making light of 2000 some odd trucks they have smashed ( how many into other innocent people ), but having so many more in reserve that it doesn't matter to them. Or was I getting the jest of your post incorrect? I can copy and paste it if you like.

 

The info I posted is public info...just search "MCS150 Swift" and click on the result for the government's saferweb site. Not hard to find at all.

Fact of the matter still remains, that a DOT recordable incident is added to your tally whether you are at fault or not. Sitting at a red light while a drunk slams into the back of your trailer @ 90 mph is reflected in those stats just the same as if you were barreling down a hill with no brakes, blew through a red light, and ran over an old lady that was crossing the street. Because it is NOT an indicator of fault in those incidents, the number in and of itself is meaningless in any serious discussion of whether or not a company is negligent in their hiring practices. I've repeatedly pointed that out, as well as the matter of scale. When you've got 25,000+ trucks on the road, chances are good that a few of them are going to get tangled up in something EVEN if you have top-notch, highly skilled hands at the wheel. Stuff happens. According to studies, 80% of the fatal car v truck wrecks are the direct result of improper actions of the car driver. So if you use that number to figure 20% of the time the trucker played an active role in causing the wreck, that 56 becomes 11...which over a two year period is LESS THAN 1 every other month. For a company with 25,000+ trucks, I'd say they are doing pretty good in a country with nearly 68,000 traffic deaths over the past 2 years. Swift has only been "present" at 0.08% of them. Statistically, they would be "at fault" in 20% of those (0.01%). Amazingly enough, their fleet of 25,685 trucks is also 0.01% of the estimated 255.8M registered vehicles in the US. By the numbers, it looks like they are "average"...not any more or less "dangerous" than should be expected.