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

I got that survey since I am an OOIDA member. I know they will be deleting my responses because I had no issues with EOBR and overall has been a positive experience. You are right, RickG, I found the survey kind of weird also. Carriers have been trying to push drivers since the days of the Roman Empire and horse and wagons. EOBR doesn't change any of that. No carrier can "push" anyone that doesn't let them. A driver can always "vote with their feet" and leave a carrier. I just filled out the survey and laughed. I actually got more wake up phone calls from dispatch with the usual "are you going to be on time?" type questions before EOBR. Now, I hardly ever talk with operations except on load selection.

 

Well of course the PRAVDA machine worded the survey to suit the responses they wanted Same as any other government entity does


And your right you response will be "lost"

 

OOIDA is not a government entity. It is a private membership organization.

 

Yeah tell that to Spencer. How's the job on La Hoods panel doing for him? That drug czar they hired when he got voted out(well his boss did) doing great and wondrous things for your "member" organization? They still cashing those checks from first alert or did their hypocrisy get the better of them?

Funny I remember all the speeches about getting some meaningful training regulations introduced. Then Johnston and Spencer decide to steer away from that. Why?

I believe it is because they can not instill the hysteria they need to generate to stay "employed".

Got nothing for them after their true mission became apparent.

Opie Taylor, and NASTC can and have done everything they claim to be capable of and receive not one red cent of government money. Drivers can get more accurate and reliable news from a myriad of actual news sources.

OOIDA was a good premise that has been corrupted and is now about the retirement of it's leadership!

 

Thnx Rick,,any time I see OOIDA and survey its a joke,,,I really laugh at the minions that actually believe that OOIDA is something more than self-serving organization,,,

A few years ago when the HOS changed and the only way to "counter" this yet again Govt intrusion was to tell their membership,,

LOG IT LEGAL!!! and yet when the issue of EOBR's comes up some how this and that msg are totally different

 

The majority of OOIDA members don't want EOBR's. In fact, I would wager that most drivers and owners don't want the expense or intrusion. When they opposed the EOBR's they were following the wishes of most of their members. There are some issues that I think they miss the boat or land on the wrong side, but you aren't going to belong to any organization where you agree 100%. They are a good resource and do a good job of keeping the membership informed about upcoming legislation and issues that directly affect our industry and lives. They do enough where I think that it is worth the dues that I pay each year.

 

OOIDA is just trying to build cases where companies used EOBR's to harass drivers. FMCSA just lost in court because it could not prove that EOBR's won't be used to do just that.

I have no doubt that if they continue with the EOBR mandate that they will lose again in court as they have no plan to comply with the law that makes FMCSA responsible for seeing that EOBR's are not used for harassment.

 

Just what kind of harassment do you think OOIDA is expecting to have seen?

 

Funny thing about that ruling,,,WHY didnt OOIDA go after said company(s) that were harassing drivers????
Wouldnt the best intrest of the member would have been to take action against the company???



The harassment was merely a company assigning a driver with a load,because with a EOBR(ELOGS) you cant hide your available hours...

 

I still hold fast that I, and some others do NOT need a baby sitter. However, after having my CB on one nine all week and just lurking(Whaa Whaa Whaa *hiccup* Whaa) I can attest to at least 90% of the drivers on the air, NEED baby sitters.

I've changed my mind EOBR's do have some merit for some.