Dispatcher tries to force driver to drive tired. *MUST SEE*

Calling the company is so EFFECTIVE. No wonder drivers have to do whatever they can to protect their license and their lives.

 

I guarantee you this. Other companies executives will see this video and make note of it...The vid is only a couple of days old and it is all over the interwebs...

 

You can see it on this thread already. There are some "company owners" already upset about this being done, thinking it is illegal, childish and etc.

 

What's the number? I am sure a call from the concerned public about the way they attempt to force drivers to drive tired, an obvious violation of FMSCA regulation 392.3, might get them to think twice before they retaliate!!!

[TABLE="width: 98%, align: center"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 100%, colspan: 2"] All Regulations
Part 392[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 100%, colspan: 2"][TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%, align: left"][/TD]
[TD="width: 50%, align: right"][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 100%, colspan: 2"]Subpart A - General

§ 392.3Ill or fatigued operator.No driver shall operate a commercial motor vehicle, and a motor carrier shall not require or permit a driver to operate a commercial motor vehicle, while the driver's ability or alertness is so impaired, or so likely to become impaired, through fatigue, illness, or any other cause, as to make it unsafe for him/her to begin or continue to operate the commercial motor vehicle. However, in a case of grave emergency where the hazard to occupants of the commercial motor vehicle or other users of the highway would be increased by compliance with this section, the driver may continue to operate the commercial motor vehicle to the nearest place at which that hazard is removed.
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
This is for the driver, who may wish to become intimately familiar with this info!

[Taken right off the FMCSA website,:Interpretation for 392.3:]
Subpart A - General

[h=3]§392.3 Ill or fatigued operator.[/h]Question 1: What protection is afforded a driver for refusing to violate the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs)?
Guidance: Section 405 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (STAA) (49 U.S.C. 31105) states, in part, that no person shall discharge, discipline, or in any manner discriminate against an employee with respect to the employee’s compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment for refusing to operate a vehicle when such operation constitutes a violation of any Federal rule, regulation, standard, or order applicable to Commercial Motor Vehicle (CMV) safety. In such a case, a driver may submit a signed complaint to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

 

I think I know why the megas want dash cams that face the driver....

It's what we'll call step one in operations management.

"But, what's step two?", you ask.....

Step 2. Wire the drivers seat with a non-lethal electrical "stimulator".

There....that should solve our lazy driver problem and ensure that load gets delivered on time.

Probably should put one back there in the bunk as well...

 

Here is the FMCSA in Missouri.


Missouri Division
3219 Emerald Lane Suite 500
Jefferson City, MO 65109
Phone: (573) 636-3246 Fax: (573) 636-8901

 

I can see this getting attention in Landline Magazine and possible the trucking radio shows. The company may do one of two things. 1. Advise all dispatchers that this behavior is unacceptable. Or 2. Tell drivers no YouTube videos are to be made in their trucks.
I hope 1 is the vote.

 

Number 2 is infringement on free speech.

 

Not really. It is the company's truck and YouTube is a company owned by Google, not the government....

I've had production companies call me and wanted to film me and the truck, but my company said "no". But they are fine with what I do on YouTube.

 

Very easy to get around it.

Phone rings. Company calling. Sorry, all communication with me is to be by qualcomm. If you choose to make calls, I will be recording them.