Why CSA 2010 and E-Logs are a good thing.

Since some of you don't have a clue, I'm going to give you one, free of charge:

EOBRs are not about safety. They are about $$$$$. Follow the money. Who, in the FMCSA or which one of their buddies is heavily invested into Qualcomm or PeopleNet? Who actually owns the cover corporation with the heaviest investment? And what guv'mint agency are they in bed with?


Safety?? Puh-LEEZE!

 

That's one view, EOBR's are about enforcement and compliance. It takes away the parts of knowingly violating your hours of service. Now it's a matter of willfully. There would be no reason for it have gotten this far if people used a log book as a log book and not as a coloring book.

 

Bingo... THIS is what it is ALL about... and to a smaller degree... it's also about control.

Companies that have and push EOBR's hate the fact that their is a driver that can make some calls about routing, fueling and trip planing in general.... they don't like it... They want this control... These companies want mindless robots to get the truck from point a to point b... In fact, if there was a technology to eliminate the driver they would in a heart beat.... Why? Again $$$.... The less the driver has to think, the less they can get away with paying them.

 

It would not have gotten this far if there were not those who wanted to limit competition and who were heavily invested in these companies who manufacture the EOBR's. With the current level of safety in this industry there is no way to justify it based upon safety. It has never been about safety. The supporters only use safety as the reason so people will buy into it. Take the profit out of it and you will find that all of a sudden things are just fine as they are now. If this were actually implemented those who invested in these companies would stand to make billions of dollars. It isn't about safety. It is about all those billions of dollars that the investors would make.

 

LOL that's BS.

Follow the $$$!

 

I completely agree.....

 

If you really want to know where these regulations and requirements come from, always follow the dollar. We learned that with Bell Helmet Company in the mid to late 80's.

If there is one thing that has never changed, ever, in guv'mint, it's this: Never has any law, statute or rule been written solely for the benefit of the people it is applied to. There is always an ulterior motive and 95% of the time, that motive is money.

Need another example? Vice President Al Gore told us we need to save the environment from those nasty ol humans and stop global warming. Buy a windmill and make electricity that way. Just so happens that Al Gore has made over $90M off those same windmills....and uses more electricity in his own home in one month than any three average homes in an entire year. I don't believe in coincidence.

So who stands to make the most money from EOBRs? I can guarantee you it won't be Swift. This company resisted EOBRs as long as it could. But the regulation is written that all companies over X size have to be on them. Swift falls into that category and begrudgingly began installing them. I keep hoping the rule will be set completely aside. And there appears to be a lull in the installation of the units. I still don't have one.

There are some companies pushing for this industry wide. But be careful with that broad brush stroke. Not all are on the same page.

 

With our carrier it's about a safety department that was incapable of catching drivers' violations . The company went to Blackberrys to keep track of their drivers but didn't have the sense to match the Blackberry GPS to logs . When the FMCSA auditor did that they found many violations . E-logs are the only way my carrier can keep drivers compliant and avoid another poor safety rating .
It seemed odd that the auditor could select the drivers they did out of 3,000 drivers . I really suspect someone complained and told them where to look .
I had once advised people to avoid companies with poor safety ratings because it indicated the carrier pushed the drivers to violate HOS . That wasn't true at all in this case .Corporate has a no tolerance attitude toward noncompliance . They just aren't smart enough to enforce it .

 

This is the worlds worst get rich quick scheme. Using 30 year old technology in an industry that is too varied by types, and a multitude of regulations. Not to mention the opposition. Powerful people are typically willing to invest in something they believe in, EOBR's are not even a bad thing. Most everyone at my company who goes on them, by choice or not, ends up liking them. Very little changes, drivers feel more rested and less pressured. I don't expect to change anyone's opinion, just adding to the conversation.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSb7mlz7Hag[/ame]

Lets "Follow the Money"

Qualcommwatch the Vid)http://www.fool.com/investing/high-growth/2011/11/28/the-top-25-tech-stocks-qualcomm.aspx

Their products in 297 million cell phones world wide,up to a BILLION by 2015,,,Hmmmm yep part of the conspiracy

PeopleNet(sold to Trimble,Aug 5 2011) http://www.trimble.com/OH-OH:biggrin_2551:

And JJ Keller;http://www.jjkeller.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/topCategories_10151_-1_10551

Teamsters: Oh we cant forget their "all In also"
http://www.teamster.org/content/teamsters-urge-hours-service-rule-creates-jobs-save-lives(Federal CHa-Ching)

FLEETS;well according to :http://www.hdma.org/Main-Menu/HDMA-...s-12-As-Firms-Purge-Older-Models.html,current class 8 truck registrations are near 3.5 million and had a DROP in registrations from the previous year,,,hmmm fleets got smaller,,,Hmmph go figure,HUH??? that would mean less trucks to put EOBR's INTO(seems to defeat the purpose of premise of "Follow the Money")

BUT,,,
Small problem of United States Code getting in the way of these fine people

FMCSA:http://www.wright.edu/rsp/Security/Ethics/Intro.htm, No one can invest to a company or entity or LAW that they REGULATE