Frozen trucker case

Is he still a driver?

 

My guess is bunk heater worked fine once fuel was put in tanks ..

 

You have pointed out why we need Judge Gorsuch on the bench. 6 out of 7 judges got it wrong. OSHA rejected his claim too.

 

BTW, you reminded me of something interesting. There was a study published early in the primaries last year, and that was political affiliation by profession. The 2 strongest Republican professions were neurosurgeonstill, 98% I recall, and truck drivers, 75%.

If you are surprised that most of the post are not siding with this driver, there's your answer.

 

Midnight, settle down, this really isn't a political issue, it is a common sense one. This is an appeal judge, and the litigation was over with.

And to the bunk heater, now I have Espars installed in most of the trucks, but where there isn't one, i have a heater that is hooked up to the engine or the apu or both that provides heat, it was unclear in the transcripts what he had, I don't want to assume that it was an espar but it may be, if it isn't then to me the issue of heat in the sleeper is moot.

 

And that right there is why the left should never be allowed to run a lemonade stand, let alone a government institution. An unelected, unaccountable judge should not be making law. It is bad enough unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats are allowed to pass regulations that have the effect of being law, but at least they have oversight in that the congress can defund or abolish an out of control bureaucracy or pass laws nullifying bad regulations. Where is the oversight on judges? What recourse is there when a rougue judge (or 6) decide to take it upon themselves to decide what THEY THINK the law OUGHT to be rather than what IS the law of the land. For judges to go in AFTER THE FACT and make changes to the law which retroactively alter the way the parties involved in the case should have acted in a situation that has long since passed, well the Constitution outright PROHIBITS the Congress from doing such a thing. They are called ex post facto laws. If what you do today is made to be illegal tomorrow, they cannot come back on the next day to arrest you for what you did prior to the law being passed. Essentially, those 6 activist judges did just that to the company. At the time of the incident, there was NOTHING IN THE LAW to prohibit the company from doing exactly as they did. Several years later, a few judges decide that it SHOULD HAVE BEEN against the law, so they hold the company liable for breaking their imaginary law.

Courts should rule on what IS, not on what they'd like to see. If you want to change what IS, win some elections, pass some legislation, and have it signed into law. Then, the next time a similar case comes before the courts, they can rule based upon that new law.

 

Not surprised at all. Most truckers will fight to the death for the right to be exploited. Bibles, bullets, and beans are all you really need.

 

Dispatcher: ...Are we clear now?
Driver: Listen, I don't think you understand. The freakin trailer is
Dispatcher: STOP! Enough already. This is so simple. Remember your training? This was covered, you do not unhook for any reason or you will be fired for abandoning your load. That's it. It's that simple. Do you know why it's that simple? They made it so simple that even a driver could understand. No thinking required. That's it, goodbye!

 

To survive and thrive in this industry one can't require constant hand holding. You have to be an independent thinker who can deal with issues on your own. You have to like the freedom to make some decisions.

If it weren't for the megas trying to change all that I imagine the 75% would be higher.

 

Sometimes making your own decisions though can bite you.