Paperless logs

I'm just posting what they reported on Friday night. What they said was that EOBRs themselves were also thrown out until FMCSA came up with a single standard. I just think it is very interesting how screwed up everything gets when government gets involved.

 

Well, you're right about the Government finding a way to mess things up! But the article referenced here and on other news sources definitely say that the court decision just vacated the current rule that FMCSA was using to apply EOBR mandate to non compliant carriers. There is no vacating of any voluntary EOBR use and devices that met pre mid 2010 EOBR requirements (virtually all the commonly used devices like Qualcomm, Peoplenet, etc).

The unintended consequence of this court decision is that FMCSA could really give a rip. So what if the court vacates the current rule. FMCSA now can focus on making a blanket mandate across the board for all commercial vehicles. In other words, if OOIDA doesn't like the current rule, then they can really have a good time with a mandate for EOBR's in every commercial vehicle. Then there is no discrimination as OOIDA claimed in the recent settled suit.

askthelaw.org is on top of this and came to this conclusion before I did. I get the feeling that this great big "win" by OOIDA will actually be a big loss in the big scheme of things. The Legislature has already moved to have FMCSA create an across the board EOBR mandate. With this recent court decision, FMCSA can just bypass the current rule and work on the one the Legislature wants.

This ought to be interesting to watch. It might be that we all wish OOIDA had kept it's mouth shut. Sometimes, as a member of OOIDA, I just shake my head and wonder what those characters in Grain Valley are thinking. They jump up and scream before analyzing the ramifications of getting their way.

 

From my point of view OOIDA are just a bunch of rabble rousers and instigators. They throw out inflamatory remarks intended to garner more support from their members and the disenfranchised.

 

almost like union trouble makers...that end up making it all worse

 

From what I understand the issue was a failure to address the potential for driver harassment. There are a lot of companies that could care less about safety, if you have the hours to run, you better be running. This isn't an issue for the better companies, but there are plenty of companies that could care less, I've worked for a couple of them. Everyone forgets that the whole purpose for the hours of service are to make sure company drivers aren't forced to work too many hours. Drivers need to be protected their companies and sometimes from themselves.

I have no personal issue with e-logs, but people need to remember you can fudge them just as you can with paper logs. They don't keep you from driving when you are out of hours, they just record it. Personally, I think it's a whole lot easier to use the e-log and as long as I can email a copy to my inbox to be printed or stored on my hard drive I'm a happy camper. I'm still on paper logs, but the e-log is operating in a demo type mode. I use it to help me with times and locations for my paper log. I also like the available driving clock when I'm on the road.

 

Preacher Man, thank you for sharing your thoughts. You're insight is very valuable to the forum, keep on posting!

 

OOIDA is, in a sense, a Union. It is an organization that uses dues paid by their members to finance lobbying and legal challenges to rules and regulations. A Union that doesn't really do anything for their members except offer insurance at a "discount" rate from the open market. Insurance that requires membership in OOIDA...and like any Union, the members have no say in how the dues are used to fund lobbying efforts.

You are correct...the ruling was aimed at the "harassment" of drivers! Which I don't understand...I've seen one "report" of a driver claiming he was being video and audio recorded through his EOBR device. Still trying to figure this out...how it is possible...wouldn't one notice the camera?

Prime just lost a fairly substantial case in regard to "pushing" a driver to run when the driver was uncomfortable driving in the conditions. But because she had the hours available, they deemed it "go-able" and took her personal decision of safety to be moot!

I found the E-log to actually be a convenience...once I got in the habit of changing the duty status at every change. With the edit function activated, a driver who forgets to move from Line 4 to either Line 2 or Line 1...this error can be fixed and made correct. You just can't edit the Line 3 times.

 

With E-logs. What if u move from a parking area to the dock in the middle of your 10. Does that start it all over or what. That about of u run out of hours sitting at a shipper (gro warehouse) and they say u have go. What do u do then? We know it happens.

 

no cat its set for so many miles at a certain speed to move you to the driving line, naw that never happens...lol

 

Then you go to safe parking and run over your 14 and it's logged. Technically a violation, just hope you don't get logs checked by dot in the next 8 days.