My thoughts right away were that many and maybe even most truckers would rebel to some degree. It looks like it may not be needed though, if they're allowing room for safety here. Like if it's too hot or too cold... As the driver, that should positively be our call, not the state's. So I think many might take the time to fight tickets if they feel their idling was necessary. Nobody is more responsible for driver safety than the driver, and nobody else should be.
CA idling law??? Tickets? Enforcement??
Discussion in 'Trucking Industry Regulations' started by RobW, Jan 9, 2008.
Page 14 of 29
-
-
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
-
I don't see where they make any such exceptions. NY even will fine you irregardless of the heat. The law is for temperatures below 25 degrees.
California left a little note about adverse weather. It would not include normal high or cold temperatures.
The only hope is whether OSHA will step in. -
If they haven't left any room for driver discretion, I would do what I feel is right and if needed, fight a ticket. I don't think all that many tickets are being issued at this point, and would fight one if I got nailed when I thought it necessary to idle. That's likely the only thing which may bring any relief to drivers.
-
Just wait. I'm sure they will step it up when the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach put their new requirement in affect.
I think it's an easy way to show the EPA that the areas in the state are taking steps to come in compliance with the Clean Air Act. After all who's bigger the oil companies or the trucking industry? The oil companies can fight what they want much better than the trucking industry.
It will not change unless there's an accident and a few people get killed and they can prove that the driver did not get the proper rest. It's a sad thing to happen but that's the way it works. But of course there's a much better way and that's to not drive in CA. But who's going to loose their job?RBPC Thanks this. -
Actually, if you got a ticket, I would try to turn it in for reimbursement.
Tell your company they should have planned ahead for the drivers and they are responsible for the lack of adequate health and safety protection.RBPC Thanks this. -
There's another approach. But I would plan to fight it because the company prolly won't fork over the cash in most cases. They'll use the excuse that the driver is responsible. While that is true and I wouldn't want it changed, we're also at the mercy of policing, whether or not it is remotely fair to any of us.
-
Yep,im in agreement with most everything ya'll have said. I too am a dog person but dont think a truck is a good way of life for mine. I hope PETA does get the law amended thou, ive got about 10,000 frogs out by the pond,& im thinking 1 in a box "with air holes of corse" riding shotgun would be ok.
-
If you, or the company you work for, were to buy a new truck with the right engine and proper decal affixed to the exterior of the cab you may idle in Kalaphornya all your little hearts desire. At least for a year, or so.
I guess that about settles it.
-
"California carried out 3,790 idling inspection in 2007, issuing 224 citations and collecting $15,400 in fines?"
Hmmmmmm
I wonder how much the California taxpayers actually paid for those 3,790 inspections that resulted in their collection of $15,400 in fines.
I'm mathematically challenged --- can anyone good at crunching numbers tell me/us what percentage of those inspected Big trucks failed?
Yet, rather than assume most Big trucks are burnin' clean, the powers that be figures that most AREN'T?
Hmmmmmmm
Ain't that kinda a flawed way to look at thangs?
-
I'm "challenged" there as well... But I figure that's about 17 inspections per fine... About $69.00 per truck cited...
We sure know they got their money's worth on that one!! heheheh
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
Page 14 of 29