Should yearly hair follicle testing be mandated as a condition of retaining CDL

Discussion in 'Trucking Industry Regulations' started by nredfor88, Nov 25, 2022.

?

Should yearly hair tests be required as a condition of retaining CDL?

  1. Yes, testing should be required.

    21 vote(s)
    26.6%

  2. No, testing should not be required.

    58 vote(s)
    73.4%
Page 12 of 12
  1. Northeasterner

    Northeasterner Medium Load Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2018
    Messages:
    395
    Thanks Received:
    320
    0
    Yes, they should mandate it.

    This would help kick tens of thousands of drivers out of the industry, making the driver shortage worse, forcing companies to compete more fiercely for the 90-95% of remaining drivers, and ultimately driving up pay for those of us who remain.

    This wouldn't actually improve safety, but it would increase my pay, since I don't use drugs. So from a "what helps me?" POV, absolutely this is a great measure!
     
    Northeasterner, Jan 21, 2023
    #111
  2. kemosabi49

    kemosabi49 Trucker Forum STAFF Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Messages:
    10,599
    Thanks Received:
    45,358
    Location:
    SW Arkansas
    0
    There is not now, nor has there ever been, anything close to a "driver shortage". The ATA has been crying driver shortage since the 90s. Wasn't any then. Ain't one now, There may be a shortage of properly trained drivers but the ATA has only themselves to blame for that.
     
    kemosabi49, Jan 21, 2023
    #112
    Gearjammin' Penguin and Northeasterner Thank this.
  3. Northeasterner

    Northeasterner Medium Load Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2018
    Messages:
    395
    Thanks Received:
    320
    0
    Yeah it's a pay shortage, not a driver shortage. OOIDA really says it right.
    There *is* supply and demand tho, and if you remove 5-10% of drivers w/ more drug testing, well demand ain't going nowhere... so pay will hafta rise.
     
    Northeasterner, Jan 21, 2023
    #113
Page 12 of 12