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

This is exactly what I was thinking.

I only got this video in my QC yesterday. Before that I only heard about it. I gotta say that Swift has been pretty good to me at times during this adventure but I will NOT sit there with a camera in my face.

You want more protection in the form of a camera to video traffic? I already have my own dash cam. If something goes down they can watch that. But as far as having a camera installed to babysit me? NO FREAKIN WAY!

When I saw this video last night I have to say that it put me in a really foul mood. To me, it feels like a slap in the face. I've been safe. No tickets. 100% on time. Yet you still feel the need to watch me and the rest of us?


Why doesn't Swift put these cameras only in those trucks where there are a high level of incidents/events/etc.?


Let me say, coming from a previous life in the legal field, these videos could easily be subpoenaed by an attorney for the other party in an accident. Let's use an example. Let's say that you are driving along and someone is going to miss their exit. They are in the lane to the left of you, you are in the granny lane and they decide at the last minute they are going to cut right in front of you to make the exit. As they cut in front of your truck they can't get into the already exiting traffic, they slam on their brakes and you rear-end them. They are injured and this all goes to court.

Do you think a decent attorney won't pick everything apart in that video? Do you think that Swift can reduce their own liability and payout in this case by putting it all on the driver? That attorney will break down the video as if it was under a microscope. Look at the driver's eyes, he looked away from the road to check his mirrors. Maybe he shouldn't have been checking his mirrors so much. Look at the driver on the CB...or...look at him pick up that bottle of water to take a sip..and so on and so on. That is that attorney's job and if it is found that you could have been doing anything differently or you were in any way at fault, who will be the one to lose everything?

To me this comes down to a benefits versus risk versus quality of life and livelihood. And I don't see how drivers will benefit from this regardless of what the talking head on the video states. His "selling" us on this new camera concept is insulting. Screw this.

 

There is no way it will ever help the driver.

 

NAIL ON THE HEAD!! Doc. Bravo!!!
I would only add this. Ten seconds pre and post "event"????? Fishbait!! The cam will be recording if your truck is running. Whatever memory capability the cam has they can watch. You can buy a 64gig sd card for a dashcam. Who will have "custody" of said cam?? It won't be the driver. You'll sign a release upon hire and an agreement to pay for said device if you disable it.

Don't be fooled by the fish bait friends. In our litigious society a driver facing cam is for one purpose and only one. Throw the driver under the proverbial bus in order to shift liability.

Now if a driver wishes to rationalize away the facts, it's their prerogative. I'm simply not that driver.

Personally, I'm not certain if I'll wait for them to call me in for installation. I'm presently seeking employment elsewhere. If I find the right company, I won't get reassigned a truck after our move to Texas.

 

Hubby is hoping he is far enough down the line in the inst
allation process to get his first year in and schooling paid for, since that was always our plan anyway. OTR is not really the life for us. If he is called in to do it before his year is up, not sure what his choice will be.

 

I'm trying to see if any driver has one benefit to them from the driver facing camera? Anyone?

Here are words from the video I find amusing and I have defined their true meaning IMO.
Protect the driver - Meaning accept this camera facing you and we won't fire you.
Dont listen to the bad info - Meaning don't educate yourself to all available information, uh what?
Benefits the driver - The driver facing cam does not benefit me at all.

The drive cam video ad at the end shows a car pacing besides a big rig, this is unsafe behavior so it nullified the rest of the video which was pointless too.

 

Well yes and no. I've looked at these systems for my own company. They do indeed record constantly. But only in a 10 second loop. IOW as its recording this second right here its also dumping what it recorded 11 seconds ago. Once its dumped, its essentially gone. And that goes on constantly until an event is triggered. At that point the current 10 second loop is captured along with the next 10 seconds and that 20 second clip is printed to memory and uploaded to a server. Believe it or don't, I could care less. But I'm not affiliated with the camera people or swift so I've got no dog in this race. I'm just an ex-driver who now drives a desk for a small trucking company. We looked at these systems and, so far anyway, passed on them.

Yep. More or less true. There will inevitably be cases where the driver facing camera plays in the drivers favor by backing up what the driver claims he or she saw/did/was doing at the time of the accident. But its debatable whether or not that driver facing footage would be the only thing saving the driver from being found liable in an accident. For the most part, that driver facing camera is there to prove guilt. Sad but true I'm afraid.

Of course as has already been pointed out, that is also the reason for just about every camera used on factory floors or fast food kitchens and every other place of business. Its not to protect the innocent, its to catch the guilty.

 

Which begs the question why then are you driving anything that says swift on the side?

 

Simple at the present time it works for me but the front faceing camera will make me leave

 

To comment on the bolded parts of your text. The problem with the camera backing up what the driver claims is that if the attorney on the other end is stronger than he could basically pick out anything to show that the driver was distracted. It's one of my biggest issues with this camera that faces the driver. I think in the end, in litigation, it would come down to the opposing attorney grabbing at anything to show that the driver was somehow not doing exactly the perfect thing. Then I think it would have to be decided in court whether the driver's actions were "reasonable". Was it reasonable that the driver was looking at the opposite mirror? He was looking too long in the mirror? Shouldn't have been putting down his sun shade at that exact moment? Changing the radio station? Using the CB? Singing to music? Touching his Qualcomm? Anything and everything will be open to interpretation and anything can be challenged by the opposing attorney. Just seems like too much weight on the driver just trying to do his/her job and do what is right.

And where does Swift and these other companies stand in protecting the drivers should (and, more accurately, when) a traffic incident goes to court? We understand the Critical Event aspect of it - driver gets a critical event, video goes to whomever, driver is counseled. But what about when there is an accident? Will Swift or any other company automatically defend us in court? If not, under what circumstances and how will that be determined? Who determines this? Even if we think what we were doing was correct procedure, will we be left out to dry when it comes to something litigious?


Regarding camera's used on factory floors, fast food kitchens and even in almost every retail setting, one of the main differences between those situations and that of an OTR truck driver is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Those cameras on factory floors, fast food, retail, etc. are mostly used for theft prevention and to identify internal theft. And, to a lesser degree, for safety violations.

 

There will never be a cade where the cam helps a driver. No matter what any ambulance chaser can turn the drivers actions against them