Comments on SNPRM about eobrs

Every quote that is being made fun of here has 1 or more valid points in it. The authors of those quotes may not know how to state their concerns without sounding "whiny", but at least they are making an effort to stop the nonsense being piled on us by the government.

It has been made very clear here and in other threads that the ones making fun and giving lame excuses for their own behavior just want to drag everyone else down to their level.

 

I think the comment/brief filed by OOIDA tells it all, and in a logical sense - with backup proof.

Cheaters gonna cheat - haters gonna hate.

The greatest issue is shippers putting almost unreasonable running times on loads, then detaining you at pickup and expecting you to keep your drop appointment in the even more diminished (and unreasonable in some cases) time allotted - without regards to speed limits, driver safety and HOS regulations.

That's the first form of harassment - and the second form is carriers that don't adequately penalize shipper for this detention, and also have a clause in the rate agreement that sets BACK the appointment time, by the same amount of time that the shipper detains the driver at the pickup point - causing the carrier to harass the driver to make the drop appointment - despite the fact that the shipper has created a situation where the drop appointment cannot realistically be made - LEGALLY and SAFELY by the rules.

Carriers already use EOBR's to disturb the drivers sleep period - line 2 should MUTE the #### thing so carriers can't constantly disturb resting drivers.

EOBR's can cheat the system - going to line 1 after 15 minutes on line 3 for "loading/unloading" for example - when a driver that is HELD RESPONSIBLE for the load NEEDS TO BE PRESENT for a count and to ensure the load is put in the box properly so the trailer is loaded correctly for axle weights/safety and so the load doesn't get damaged in transport. This is NOT "Off Duty" or "Sleeper Berth".

OOIDA's brief on this, covers the real salient points of why mandatory EOBR's are neither cost effective, increase safety, provide remedies for driver harassment, or are any more accurate than paper logs.

Privacy & 4/5 amendment issues aside - should you put an "ankle monitor" on gross repeat offenders of HOS rules? Sure.

Can WE (the drivers) get loads to their destinations, legally & safely in the allotted time (assuming the load planners actually do their job in DETERMINING transit times/factors that can be accomplished safely/legally) - sure, if the regulatory agencies recognize and penalize shippers/receivers who detain drivers so that the "reasonable" transit time can NOT be accomplished safely & legally.

Does this fall down to "you can't make a living running legally"? Cheap load rates and company drivers low mileage pay aside - if adequately compensated for delays by shippers/receivers - I believe one CAN.

Should the big companies/consistent harassers be compelled to monitor compliance electronically to ensure driver safety? If provisions for HARASSMENT are built into the rule, as they were ORDERED by the legislation to do.

I'll run an EOBR - it's called DRIVERS DAILY LOG.

The PRIMARY ISSUES that FORCE noncompliance (detentions & harassment) need to be dealt with. Then the EOBR just becomes another "tool of the trade" and can actually have the desired effect.

READ THE OOIDA FILING. Copy & past the more salient points into your comments on the RFC - these are the TRUE ISSUES that must be dealt with. If the gubberment wants to PAY FOR the expensive wall clock in my truck - that can be cheated with line 1/2 entries just as easily as a paper log - more power to them.

And the biggest thing that would help with compliance, is a "whistleblower clause" that would compensate the DRIVER with the punitive penalties imposed on the CARRIER for harassment and compelling the driver to run illegally.

Rick

 

Just to point out, I wasn't making fun of the one I posted, I actually really did like it. You are right, although there were a lot on there that I read, that the people making the comments seemed to have absolutely no clue what was going on. I couldn't believe all of the horrendous spelling and grammar mistakes. I usually don't critique on here because it's just a forum, but writing a comment on a public board to a government agency? Show some pride and dignity and at least use spell check or something so you'll be taken more seriously.

Ron

 

As a former bullhauler, i can do some mighty good colorin' if i do say so myself. Though the days of the outlaw is gone, and so are my outlaw days so it comes down to that 14 hour rule, thou i do agree with some of the comments here.....

 

There are big fourth and fifith ammendment concerns.
If you're forced to use a eobr you could be giving incriminating testimony against yourself if you were to violate the rules, How would they know you violated unless you had to enter the tracking information?
You can say well your supposed to follow the rules, that don't get it. The concept of the USC and our founding fathers were to HAVE THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE. It don't say freedom of choice ecxcept when it comes to fmsca.
Now if your employer wants to use one thats different.
There is also the unreasonable search and seizure they can come and get these records for any reason without any reasonable suspicions or grounds for doing so. The company you work for must have some crapy rules you really hate, cause you are unable to see the real bug picture of things?
You keep typing rules, rules without thought of do they really accomplish anything? this is the same mentallity that lahood and co. use they want to call the fire department after the house has burned down.

 

I hate agreeing with you, but for the most part you're right.

 

You seem to forget the USC trumps all fmsca rules. You can rationalize anyway you want, but the eobr has serious issues with the 4th and 5th ammendement. You don't give up constitutional rights just cause you get a MC#. So what ever you claim is just hypocrisy and meant to be a smoke screen cause it don't fit your way of thinking.
You keep trying to infer I'm lieing all the time?? Do you not understand I know how to REMAIN SILENT? So how can it be a lie if I never say?
Not to say I would need too. You keep waving the the rules and regulation flag in one post and then state later your employer has bad fatigued driver score?
I guess your the only poster boy there?
As to me looking for a big payday it will only happen if they make a mistake.
I'm not looking for anything for nothing long before I had a mc# the system wrongly cost me over 250,000.00 and a good business, so lets say i'm looking for a refund. You really don't have no idea how things work and you want this "knight in white rules" , well nothings is black and white it's a nasty shade of gray.