DOT English proficiency test

Lol, the big secret.

“It’s unclear how safety inspectors will decide whether a driver knows enough English because that portion of the instructions was redacted from the guidance distributed by Transportation Department.”

What if they actually speak English but their vocabulary isn’t understood by an officer?

 

““A truck driver who does speak English sufficiently to comply with federal standards but maybe they speak with an accent, or maybe they use a different vocabulary that the inspector isn’t used to hearing: Is that person then going to be subject to an English language violation?” Kaur asked. “And under the new policy, are they then going to be designated out-of-service, which could result in unemployment?”

Truckers practice English skills as US language policy takes effect

 

One way to cure the problem.

Have an ELP endorsement on your license.

No one would escape this requirement and then it becomes neutral. No one gets singled out.

 

"What are you hauling?"

"I don't know, whatever P&G loaded"

That was me my first year when the drug dog indicated at the Border Patrol checkpoint north of Laredo.

Now that response would potentially earn me and ELP violation.

I cannot begin to calculate the numbers of BOLs that only listed skids, product id and weight. It's almost as many as the ways an officer can twist the statute to get the outcome they desire.

 

Sounds similar to what I did in Florida at the AG check.

Officer “what are you hauling”

Me “refrigerated foods”

He asked a couple more times and I became lost for words..froze up so to speak.

Obviously agitated he sent me to the side for an inspection.

I was doing multi stop reefer load and there were probably a hundred different items.

Should have just said butter but instead I fumbled it.

 

You don't like the guidance? The onus is on the carrier, just like it always was.
The regulation was enforced for many years until one administration told the FMCSA to ignore it.
Now a new one recinds that order.
The guidelines "suggest" several programs to be in compliance.
No different than when drug testing started.
That was refined over time, so will this.

 

Nothing about guidance, it's just the way you argue. A GenXer, or especially Millennials argue in a different way, usually trying to come up with explanations or different words, but you just kept repeating the same thing.
I just found it funny, that's all.

 

You've lost as soon as you start calling names.
As you can see, there is guidance for the carrier in the initial hiring process or follow up. Again, the onus is on the carrier, not the driver.
To argue there isn't just shows lack of wanting to know.
https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulatio...ivers-english-language-proficiency-elp-during

 

This is about driver qualification BEFORE being cited.

What happens after?

 

What part of the onus is on the carrier do you not understand?
Driver is OOS until the carrier determines that they are proficient.
It explains how to determine that. That can't be done at the scale, driver is returned for training.
If the carrier fails at that then they are subject to administrative fines just like any other violations.
If a state (at this time only AR) adopts the regulation as a traffic offense then the driver/carrier can be cited/fined just like
any other traffic offense and can choose to fight it in court.
This isn't something new, the regulation has been around for a long time and was a OOS violation. One administration said ignore it, another said enforce it. Too many are acting like this is something new.
I had 1/2 of a team put OOS for it in 2001