sleeper requirements

With all due respect there is a huge difference between being non-cooperative and maintaining your right to stay silent. This right has been part of our legal system for years. As a driver you are in a highly regulated industry, because of this some give and take is required. However when the questions start and they are asking for information they lack the legal right to have, well-staying silent is not being non-cooperative it's being wise. There is a medium area here. Both extremes are wrong. If you chose to punish a driver for maintaining their right to stay silent I would not want to work for you.

 

I should go read that rule. I think it is in 390. I also think it has been in that section for longer than the FMCSA has been around. I asked an FMCSA auditor once about it. She told me it was a tool for a compliance officer to check out a passenger and was written to be vague. Then she laughed and said like most all the other rules.

 

I've always admired your ability to argue a point and do so in a civil manner. That's rare these days.
However:
The driver wouldn't be fired for being silent. The driver would be fired for not using enough common sense to know when to talk and when to keep quiet. Answering questions without incriminating yourself doesn't require a genius IQ, just a little common sense.
He'd be fired for bringing unnecessary heat on the company because when he's out there on the road he is the company as far as DOT is concerned. If he's being busted for an HOS violation or anything else that he, as a driver, could have prevented he's in trouble already.
And lastly, he'd be fired because if he can't conduct himself in a manner agreeable to all concerned he's not doing his job. If he or the truck are placed OOS because he won't communicate with the DOT and we have to send out another driver, explain to the customer why the load is late, and bear all the costs involved and we had no expectation that he'd act appropriately the next time a similar situation arose we wouldn't keep him. Nobody wants a driver like that and nobody will keep one for very long.
There is one thing that you and I agree on, sort of a common ground...you wouldn't work for me and I wouldn't have a driver like you. You won't change my mind and I don't think I can change yours. See? Sometimes we can agree on things.

 

I am one of the rare ones who think that ELD is a positive thing, and this topic is one of the reasons why. No more " creative writing " in paper log books to be argued.
Logged as off duty, is off duty, nothing more to discuss. Actually I don't even see an option for " sleeper time " on my ELD. It has three choices, Off duty, on duty, and driving. Wish they had been mandatory 35 years ago when I started.

 

I'm not saying that anybody should have to "cower in fear" as you put it. Nobody in our company is afraid of cops but we know better than to provoke them without reason.
Some driver's refusal to answer questions is because he's afraid of the cop and feels intimidated by the process. There's no need for him to feel that way.
If a driver can't, or chooses not to, prove his HOS or if he won't reply to a civil question that would resolve the matter and send him on his way is using bad judgement.

Arguing with a cop or obstructing him will usually get you nothing but grief.
Court is the place for arguments, not the side of the road and not the scalehouse.

You're right about one thing though. If one of our drivers knowingly does something illegal and then, when he's caught, purposely does something stupid and tries to cover up or excuse his mistake or tries to lie his way out, we probably won't stand behind him.

It's been over twenty years since we've had to deal with a situation like that. I truly believe our drivers have better sense than to get into a "mine's bigger than yours" with a LEO. Again, that is what a court room is for.

 

Well coming back to this thread showed me how off topic it got.....lol....

 

I have no idea What section nor do I care. As I clearly stated previously, the FMCSA issued a letter spefifically stating that product did not meet the requirements and that letter has been previously posted on this website.

Your free to do whatever you want. This "random guy from the internet" could care less what you do. Not my horse, not my barn, not my problem.

 

Last night after my last post I had to go to the hospital ER. In fact I have not been home all the long.

I noticed in your comment you equated a driver standing on their rights as making an argument. Then engaging in mine is bigger than yours. Then several times mixed that back into a driver acting stupidly. I have repeatedly stated a driver must not be rude or refuse to comply with lawful instructions and provide information the officer has a right to. I am not talking about this. You bring up the courts. The problem in almost every instance if a case has got that far the driver has done one of two things. Either caught dead to rights and fighting it out of stubbornness. Or started answering those dang gotcha questions and got into trouble.

As I indicated earlier. I have several retired DOT cops that are close friends. One attends the church where the pastor helps me around and does check calls on me. To a person all have told me they just don't like to be lied to. Cops by training are always going to push that envelope to see what they can learn about a driver. You could tell that cop I slept in the backseat in a sleeping bag. You logged off duty. Nothing really more the cop can legally do. Lie to the cop and it will just be something else later. This is why I suggested simply not answering the question to start with. Not answering this question and doing so in a polite way is not wrong. The cop has no legal right to know and if that cop retaliated by placing the driver OOS it is the cop causing the argument and using the ruler. Looks like you and I are never going to agree on this topic. As I said I doubt I could ever work for a company any company that puts acting out of fear over backing a driver when that driver is right to maintain the line defined by the appellate courts when it comes to this. To sum this all up. A driver is not wrong to keep a cop on their side of the Constitution. However any action taken against driver by DOT or the carrier is most definitely wrong.

 

One more point and I think I am going to depart this thread. I think if one were to examine my posting history, you would find that I tend to be pro-carrier in almost every situation. As a driver, I have my carriers back and expect them to have mine. Further, I do not feel this is an unreasonable expectation either. I also tend to be pro-cop and am generally conservative politically. I am also a very private person and I guard that privacy. I would never be rude to a cop or for that matter my employer either.

Several years ago I was asked by a young driver a question. I will never forget that guy or the company he drove for. The guy asked me if he was legally required to show his logbook to a non-certified cop. My reply was (paraphrasing) Do what you have to do to get that flashing light out of your mirror, forget the legal and comply with the request. I also still standby that reply. I have the utmost respect for law enforcement done correctly by cops that follow the rules, I do NOT respect cops that don't follow the rules and get the ruler out to show theirs is larger than yours is. I do agree with @REO6205 in regard to not allowing a driver to cause a service failure or cause the carrier to have to change how they operate. Some drivers take this issue way too far and they are wrong. I think I told a story not long ago of having to help a friend get his son out of jail because he got eaten up with stupid.

Almost all of the US CFR is filled with rules that are left up to the regulators to interpret, in fact, there was a recent Court decision that might be about to limit this power. Title 49 (transportation) is full of vague hard to understand rules. These rules sometimes conflict. Thankfully most DOT cops are just as much in a hurry as you are to finish up. They won't really push an issue unless YOU the driver peeve them off. Woe be unto that driver. I would join in with @REO6205 in having that driver fired and would help them clean out their truck. Then you run into a true (Richard Cranium) DOT officer and no matter what you do that officer is gunning for you. This situation is what @REO6205 was referring to in my opinion when he talked about the courts. If the carrier did not back this driver after the fact I would upon learning of this would be ASAP cleaning out my truck and telling that carrier to kiss my rear. I refused to drive for a Micky Mouse outfit when I was active and still would not today!