Camera's are coming to a truck near you or Yours.

The company I drive for doesn't even use satellite tracking. I can assure you, they won't have driver facing cameras in 2 years.

No driver facing camera was needed to clear those Millis drivers.

 

tom of tk, can so.... wal mart trucks have been involed in 380 crashes in the last two years, NINE people have been killed and 129 others injured... first report that came on google just sayin

 

And how many was Walmart at fault for? Get back to me when you have the real answer. I didn't come to the Swift forum to debate Swift vs Walmart, only the merits of driver facing cameras. Just FYI, no driver is leaving Walmart to join Swift. Wonder why.

 

3 years is considered long term?

 

tom those are fed's numbers... they don't give at fault determinations ..... just sayin they happened .... i'm pretty sure not all of swift's accident are their fault either

 

and "EOBR ' are mandated by CONGRESS already,,, these are required to monitor speed, sever braking, sudden lane changes, and driving time... ect... coming in 2015 ???

 

My truck has slow radiator leak, not taking it in. Then again they they watch all over my cab, who is going to end up being more offended?

 

I have a feeling these cameras/microphones will have all sorts of electrical bugs that render them useless, make sure to keep those trusty cameras way from lasers that can fry sensors of even the best pro cameras. Those Swift lawyers are ruthless, don't ever hit a Swift truck with good evidence against you.

 

This is all very interesting, but two worlds may collide at some point regarding video/audio in trucks.

1) Outward facing-there is clearly no expectation of privacy on public streets, highways, and parking lots. Courts have decided this time and time again. So ... cameras area clearly alllowed.
2) Inward facing (driver) camera. Courts have, again, decided that in most places in the workplace (locker rooms, rest rooms, and other places of the ilk being exceptions), there is no expectation of privacy. So, in a day cab, a camera would fall into this category of 'no expectation of privacy'.

Where it gets tricky, however, is in this instance: Under case law pertaining to Search and Seizure (Reference the 4th Amendment please if you are not familiar), there is such a thing as the Motor Vehicle Exception. This means that, in certain cases, as a motor vehicle is inherently mobile, law enforcement does not usually need a search warrant to search a motor vehicle given some sort of probable cause or reasonable suspicion that criminal activity has taken place or is taking place. HOWEVER, a truck with a sleeper berth has been found to not generally fall under this exceptions BECAUSE it is a 'place of home', similar to a hotel room, for an OTR truck driver. Essentially, a truck with a sleeper berth inherently conveys an expectation of privacy, thus requiring a search warrant for a roadside search.

So, the question will become, does this expectation to privacy in a truck WITH A SLEEPER BERTH extend to the entire cab, or is the berth portion considered de-marked from the front portion of the cab? In other words, is it possible that in the driver's and passenger seats there is no expectation of privacy while in the berth the expectation of privacy is preserved? THIS is where a good lawyer may have something to work with.

 

I'll be leaving swift in November (ish) but if they did this in my company truck I would leave no if's and or buts. Unless I could see ever one in terminal ie my Dm Fm and terminal manger desk