The Great Logbook Scam

The only thing that "regulates" shippers is money. If the government would stop the overtime wage exemption for truck drivers thus requireing the trucking companies to pay overtime for truck drivers and thus pass these costs unto the shippers maybe the shippers wouldn't waste as much of the drivers time. Right now the shippers have no incentive not to waste a drivers time. Most of the carriers are too afraid of losing the shippers business to charge detention.

That is the one of the reasons why I think log books and EOBR's are only about revenue for the government. If the government was truely worried about safety then they would stop the reasons (root cause) of WHY a driver would cheat on their log book first.

 

Many would be thinking that a bad thing to be done.

After all, if you do not like the way the company treats you, leave, is what they say.

Like it would work in the real world.

 

I'm still waiting for the OP too start with the "Call the Federal Marshall's on Em". Sheesh.........

 

Let me say this just one more time - and then I'm done.


THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY DRIVER TO KEEP A LOG BOOK. Period!


Now, if you believe that to be in error, show me. Tell me EXACTLY where the Regulations say that the GOVERNMENT says it. Do NOT go off on a tangent and talk about the DOT, the Constitution, your opinions, my stupidity or anything else.

All across this country, I have told DOT officers that I would buy them the biggest steak dinners they could eat if they could show me that. I have NEVER bought a single steak!

 

Well let's see. Part 395 deals with hours of service. Under scope of the rules for this part it says all the rules apply to motor carriers and drivers. It says that for every part. The section that you "famously" quote, or should I say misquote is 395.8. The only problem with your "assumption" is you assumed wrong, misunderstand or do not understand the way the law is written. Another classic example of a truck stop lawyer spreading bad advice.
§395.1 Scope of rules in this part.
(a) General. (1) The rules in this part apply to all motor carriers and drivers

Here's the section you get hung up on. However, the rule and regulation does comply to all drivers and motor carriers because of 395.1. 395.1 concerns all of Part 395.

§395.8 Driver's record of duty status.
(a) Except for a private motor carrier of passengers (nonbusiness), every motor carrier shall require every driver used by the motor carrier to record his/her duty status for each 24 hour period using the methods prescribed in either paragraphs (a)(1) or (2) of this section.



General applicability and definitions

§355.1 Purpose. (a) To promote adoption and enforcement of State laws and regulations pertaining to commercial motor vehicle safety that are compatible with appropriate parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.
(b) To provide guidelines for a continuous regulatory review of State laws and regulations.
(c) To establish deadlines for States to achieve compatibility with appropriate parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations with respect to interstate commerce.




General applicability and definitions

§355.3 Applicability. These provisions apply to any State that adopts or enforces laws or regulations pertaining to commercial motor vehicle safety in interstate commerce.

 

Sick'em DB!

 

I bet this isn't the first time this conversation has been pursued. Now if one of you has the resources of George Soros maybe you can follow through in court. Unti that happens JJ Keller will continue to make a living off our logbook purchases.

 

Merely quoting 395.8 (A) alone likely fuels The Ancient Mariner's belief in his original contention that it is the companies who have to require the drivers to comply, not the government. quoting the aforementioned (a)(1) rather than referencing it seems indicated.

(a)(1) (In part) Every driver who operates a commercial motor vehicle shall record his/her duty status, in duplicate, for each 24-hour period.

He is however "technically" correct that no log "book" is required, but that is a rather trivial point if it is ever used as a comeback, as "log book" is commonly used to describe a "record of duty status" or log whether in book form or not.

Best regards

 

And who do you think regulates the companies requiring that they regulate the drivers, the fairy god mother?

 

Since my point was concerning the driver without regard to any company your question is sort of off point.

Did my point that (a)(1) specifically names the driver without regard to the company just speed off in to the dark or what?

Best regards