I don't understand why or how

I have no problem admitting something went way over my head

 

If you hit someone because they pulled out in front of you and you were feeding your face instead of paying attention to whats going on then yes, you contributed to the accident as well, The cameras I carry are mine personal and they record both, Won't drive with them. If a driver is paying attention 99 percent of the time you can anticipate the idiot that pulls out in front of you, most of what I see what that causes a problem, the truck did not have enough follow distance built into the situation.
I'm a driver with 3 million miles, and experience tells me that you can see whats potentially going to happen if your attention is where it belongs. You want to eat, pull over take a brake and feed your face, I see tractor trailers swerving all over the raod , on and off the shoulders and when you get up beside them they have a subway in one hand and a big gulp in the other. No Good, drivers need to start exercising good driving habits. Good safety records of drivers that have a million or more miles are not accident.

 

How do these same "bullies" (as you put it) find people to run truck for them at 35 cpm with experience?

People gotta eat, and they'll put up with a heap of bull to make money. It's a matter of how much Kool-Aid you can get them to drink to think your policies and practices are on the up-and-up.

I've heard driver-facing cameras are a real issue for some insurance companies, and they'll spend weeks combing through a driver's history just to find a single point where they can catch them doing something that can be defined as a "distraction" to deny any claim the company might have.

I'll put up with a fair bit of bull (I did for the first four years of my career in this industry, and drank the Kool-aid enough to start dispensing it), but if the company can't trust me to drive the truck safely and professionally, then I won't need to work for them any more.

 

On an accident report it will show the contributing unit number and contributing circumstances. The at fault vehicle is almost always vehicle 1. In a case where a driver fails to yield to another, that drivers actions are the primary cause of the accident. If the driver of the other vehicle states he was eating a bag of chips then that would be another contributing cause but the primary cause of the accident would be the vehicle that failed to yield..all of this would be captured on the outward facing camera.Having an inward facing does not benefit the trucking company in this case does it.
It seems to me the inward facing camera main use by companies is to spy, correct and micromanage drivers. There are plenty of companies out here that have outward facing only. It's all you need to prove who was at fault in almost all of these cases.

 

I would ####ing quit.

 

If the companies were honest about it that would be one thing. But most lie and say they’ll only look if there is an event.

My friend worked for a company that installed inward / outward cams and fed the employees that line. Her sunvisor would cover the inward cam. She gets a call from safety one day that her camera is covered. She said she’s using the sunvisor and the safety lady said it looks cloudy on the drive cam so she probably doesn’t need the sunvisor.

 

oh...ok...another one...........

 

My point exactly.

 

I had a lady on the 15 south appreoaching the 60 that turned into my left front steer axle, the driver acing camera should that I recognized, applied my air horns while searhing for a place that did not exsist in the lane to my right, so it was impossible for me to move out of the way, thus making it a non preventable accident since we were only rolling at about 2 mph.
Both views together totally exonerated me and Valley Bulk.