Millis:"We're taking better applications"...add them to the list of bottom feeder.

Where do you have proof that EOBR's can't be mandated. I think thats great news but sounds too good to be true.

 

For now they can't due to a court ruling Rick is referring to. The push is still on though. They won't be happy until they know how many squares you use to wipe your rear end.

 

Hey, Sheryl Crow says she only uses 2 or 3, I'd like to know where she wipes the rest when she has one of those "messy days"

 

CHICAGO — DOT-imposed electronic devices#meant to#monitor driving time cannot be used to harass truck drivers,#and so a 2010 e-log regulation must go back to the drawing board because it fails to address#such protections, a federal appeals court decided Friday.
The rule, Electronic On-Board Recorders for Hours-of-Service Compliance (FMCSA-2004-18490), was to take effect June 4, 2012.
Siding with the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association and three of its members, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit said the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration did not meet#a specific requirement set by Congress who, in the Truck and Bus Safety and Regulatory Reform Act of 1988,#“foresaw that monitoring devices on trucks might be used to enforce Hours of Service rules, and that these devices could potentially be used to harass drivers.”
Harassment, according to the OOIDA petition, would#encompass the sort of pressure carriers exert over drivers. This includes#ordering them to keep driving — whether tired or not — as long there is time remaining under the Hours of Service limit,#as monitored by an EOBR system. Additionally, the regulation — which#was to be applied to carriers “that have demonstrated serious noncompliance with HOS rules” — would have imposed EOBRs on all drivers for those carriers,#including#drivers with no history of log violations.
And even though OOIDA and others#filed comments voicing driver harassment concerns during the rulemaking process, FMCSA’s April 5, 2010, final rule stated simply that the agency “has taken the [statutory requirement] into account,” the court noted.
FMCSA argued such a statement#is, by itself, enough to satisfy the requirement.
“It is not,” the court said. “Unfortunately, however, this sentence does represent the entirety of the Agency’s direct consideration of harassment.”
The#appeals panel#cited#the “well established” rule that says a federal agency “must articulate a reason for its action that demonstrates a ‘rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.’ … Its explanation may not be superficial or perfunctory.”
The court also rejected FMCSA’s secondary defense: that driver harassment was addressed under the EOBR rule’s Privacy Impact Assessment. The court#ruled that harassment and privacy might be related, but harassment still must be considered independently.
“The Agency’s failure to respond to this concern, which describes a form of harassment that the statute required it to address and that raises problems distinct from privacy, renders the rule arbitrary and capricious,” the court said in vacating and remanding#the EOBR regulation#for additional rulemaking.
Noting FMCSA is developing another rule to require electronic logs for all motor carriers, the court#chose not#to take up#two other objections posed by OOIDA: a challenge to the cost-benefit analysis used to support the EOBR rule, and#the rule's#legality under the Fourth Amendment, which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures.
“Rather than reach beyond what is strictly necessary here, prudence dictates that we leave for another day any questions that might arise in connection with whatever new rule the Agency decides to adopt,” the appeals panel concluded.
In prefacing its decision, the court#hinted at the complex deliberations likely to follow#future EOBR regulations: “The briefing raises a litany of issues that would make for a difficult and exhaustive Administrative Law final exam.”
OOIDA called the court decision a “triumph” for small business truckers.
“Companies can and do use technology to harass drivers by interrupting rest periods. They can contact the driver and put on pressure to get back on the road to get the most of his or her on-duty time, regardless of how fatigued a driver may be,” said Todd Spencer, executive vice president of OOIDA. “Such a mandate would be a step backward in the effort toward highway safety and is an overly burdensome regulation that simply runs up costs for the majority of trucking, which is small-business.”
An FMCSA spokesman on Saturday said that the decision is under review by the agency.
The American Trucking Associations, which supports an EOBR mandate,#likewise said it was reviewing the decision.
“FMCSA’s research shows that compliance with the current hours-of-service rules is strongly associated with reduced crash risk. Of course, electronic logging devices are an important tool for improving hours of service compliance,” ATA President and CEO Bill Graves said. “We hope FMCSA will work quickly to address the Court’s decision and the important device design and performance specifications being evaluated by the Administrator’s Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee.”

http://www.thetrucker.com/News/Stories/2011/8/27/CourtrejectsEOBRruleondriverharassmentquestion.aspx

 

Milllis Transfer is out of Wisconsin. Wisconsin is a "hire at will-fire at will" state. As such you don't have much to work with in a equal opportunity lawsuit. Learned that with another company based out of Wisconsin.

 

i applied at millis,i have 17 years experince they were real nice to me,they were great,but decided to stay were i was at

 

Smart guy

 

This is the only area that Knight really shines at. I know a couple of people that run a couple of days and switch off with another driver. Hell if you live near a yard, it might be worth looking into.

 

I also applied as a student one time and got the same answer. The recruiter was also in rush to hang up on me.

 

I called them once and was pretty much turned off by the attitude the recruiter gave me. Asking her questions about medical coverage and benefits was like pulling her teeth I guess.