Why a strike? The CSA 2010 will cripple trucking.

man when ya gonna come out here. I'll train ya!

 

Deal!!! When do we start???

I'm hoping to be in school late May, early June. I hate to admit it but I'm as excited as a teenager on his first date. I don't know what to expect even though I've read posts on here until my eyes bleed. I guess the greatest unknown for me is how driving is really going to fit my personality or, better stated, how my personality is going to adapt to driving. I'm confident that it will adapt at about a 95% rate but the 5% is where the surprises will come from. One thing is for sure, I'll give it all I've got to give. Doesn't make sense to do any less.

 

here is something to check out....I did a bit of research on this csa2010
Will CSA 2010 assign safety ratings to individual CMV drivers? I heard that CSA 2010 is designed to rate CMV drivers and to put many of them out of work this summer.
No. Under CSA 2010, individual CMV drivers will not be assigned safety ratings or safety fitness determinations. Consistent with the current safety rating regulations (49 CFR part 385), individual drivers will continue to be rated, as they are today, following an onsite investigation at their place of business when they operate independently as a "motor carrier" (i.e. have their own USDOT number, operating authority, and insurance). CSA 2010 will provide enhanced tools for Safety Investigators to identify and address drivers with poor safety records as part of motor carrier investigations in order to increase driver accountability for safe driving behavior. CSA 2010 is designed to meet one overriding objective: to increase safety on the Nation's roads. Therefore, it is, by design, a positive program for drivers and carriers with strong safety performance records Also, it will send a strong message that drivers and carriers with poor safety performance histories need to improve.


Why is there no driver rating? Why aren't drivers more accountable?
While FMCSA will not be using this or any other system to assign formal safety ratings to individual drivers, the Agency recognizes that holding drivers accountable for safe driving behavior is an important part of the safety compliance and enforcement process. Specifically, in the Operational Model Test, Safety Investigators (SIs) will systematically investigate drivers with egregious violations when investigating a carrier. By design, these egregious driver safety violations are always investigated as part of a CSA 2010 carrier investigation. Additionally, SIs will use the Driver Safety Measurement System, an internal safety assessment tool, to review drivers with strong patterns of noncompliance. Any violations that are not corrected may result in a Notice of Violation or Notice of Claim for the driver.




http://www.ooida.com/Issues&Actions/Regulatory/issues/CSA2010.shtml

 

This is a jam up good response to FMCSA's CSA 2010 from a trucking association that's in a state that has actually been working within CSA 2010 as a test state. It's fairly littered with what carriers in Minnesota feel are the inequities of CSA 2010. If you look closely enough, you'll probably get an inkling of why FMCSA has pushed back some of the rollout dates. I'd love to read FMCSA's reply to this. Thanks again for the link Thereyago!

 

(sorry it took so long to respond to you)

I have called,emailed,parked the truck on the side of the road in the last strike,preached the reasons on my 5000 watt base radio to truckers all around the nation and gotten the same response......................nothing!

It's going to take more than just a few of us to make a change and far to many don't care anymore!

 

If you drive a truck you will be dealing with big brother very soon.......and the fuel was over $4.75 in Cali for a time,you don't run out west?

There again.....if the powers that be get there way,that little black box will make sure you CAINT run over the limit!

The point i was making ( may not have been clear ) is that if ANYONE drives a truck they get screwed for the very reason i out lined in my post to you. And it is everyone's fault for not taking a stand to better the working conditions.

Then you are the exception,not the norme. You have been out here long enough to know that the rates have changed very very little unless your are in a specialized segment of the trucking industry like hauling military.

Thats the point your missing here. No matter how hard you have worked or bled to get where you are today,the government is doing its best to take it all away form you!

Sure i make very good money but what good is all of that money when everything we deal with in our business is going up up up! Fuel,fins,tolls,insurance,lumpers,taxes.....on and on. That's why i say that we should all stand up so that our hard fought earnings are not wasted to fund some fools unneeded new road or to put money in the pockets of those that could care less whether we live or die!

One driver can not make a change but a few thousand can! Oh and would rather shoot myself in the foot than do the lease thing!

I don't have the years that you have but you can sure that i know enough to see whats going on and to see that it's going to take all of us to make a change.

 

I feel it nessasary to point out that I don't object to new systems and ways of making things safer, however with the increased expectations there needs to be a corresponding rise in rates.

The system of staggered rollouts and now delays ( not to mention the mandate to use elogs as an immediete enforcement tool) make a situation where the people trying to work with the DOT are paying the cost without the money to pay for them. If the DOT is going to put this through, they need to review it and hear about the problems and fix it before putting it into use. OOIDA , companies and drivers should not have to go to court after the fact to address commonsensical problems just to preserve thier precious little system. When they do put it into use it needs to be national so that everyone is playing on the same field. The elogs in particular need to be reviewed by truckers instead of companies.

As an owner it bothers me that I am paying the costs for compliance while the DOT is doing everything it can to not have this system increase rates. It should and will increase rates and I should be payed for the extra work, risk, and danger to my business embodied in this system. If it doesn't then I will find another business with more security and better pay for the hours worked.

I also think that shippers should have some sort of responsibility in this system either financial or liable. Especially for violations that will effect the driver and companies CSA rating.

 

First off let me say i agree with you were 100%!
But just to play the devil's advocate, why should anyone we paid more for doing a the job professionally safely and legally the way were supposed to do it now?
Furthermore perhaps if everyone had been doing the job the right way from the start and not cutting corners trying to save money, there would be no need 4 csa 2010!
In addition to that the companies and drivers who for whatever reason cannot afford to or simply refuse to comply woulda been forced out of this business a long time ago.
Csa 2010 is the ####### child of ineffective law enforcement, drivers / companies that refuse to do their job right, and the constant undercutting of rates by the second rate, non professional companies, drivers and brokers
all these things have contributed to the nightmare we have today. Unfortunately The cure is pretty bad, maybe even worse than the disease

 

The costs of a "black box system" is not as bad as everyone talks about. Could be looking at as low as $20 per truck per month to as high as $60. Company may be able to lease equipment of just buy it outright. Either way, there are other benefits to the system that offset the costs. Saving on the company phone bill by being able to "instant message" each truck instead of calling them on their cell phone. Saving time on IFTA reports. Being able to track drivers route to make sure they are take the "Best" route... not adding another 150 miles out of route. What about the customers that keep calling your dispatcher and asking "Where's my frieght?" and then calling you asking for your location. Plus other benefits.

As far as electronic logs, most will put you in "on duty-not driving" when sitting in a traffic jam.

Duke

 

I don't think I get how does being put on duty not driving in a traffic jam help? As I understand it, it still takes away from your 70 hours and takes up time in the fourteen hours as well as pushing out your start time the next day. The best thing to do in a traffic jam is put yourself off duty and let the clock put you back on when you have traveled the distance or speed that turns the system back on automatically. This preserves your 70 hours even though you still lose travel within the fourteen hours. ( this hasn't really been an issue though)

For the record the biggest critique I have for the elogs is the travel time allowed before the log book is opened. I also don't like being forced to self incriminate myself if an emergancy forces me to move more than the allotted distance ( 1.5 miles) or if a detour or missed turn causes me to go over my hours. The off duty driving rules favors large companies with drop yards. If you cannot off duty drive with a trailer companies without an investment in drop yards that don't allow you to drop the trailer should be paying you for guarding thier trailer since that is what you are in fact doing. ( If they change the rule to where you can off duty drive with a trailer then that solves the issue)

Basically the distance that you can travel should be long enough reach a grocery store , truckstop, bathroom from a shipper. The current rules do not allow off duty driving if you are hauling a trailer loaded or not. Since many times I am out of hours by the time I am unloaded this forces me to self incriminate myself furthermore with the CSA rules the next DOT check has not only a record but that will take points off. This makes my ability to operate and shop around for employment harder and by extension it makes my investment in owning a truck less valuble and more risk laden.

Many of these companies and truckstops will not let you drop thier trailer even MT. Since I own my truck this is a problem since in making me perform a security function on thier trailer outside of the legislated rules i do not get to take advantage of the off duty driving status to run errands, shop, workout, perform maintenance. I think a radius of 15 miles based on the old time blocks would be sufficient for most purposes( that would be 7.5 miles straight travel). I also think that the off duty driving should be applicable if you are not under a load yet still have a trailer. I AM AWARE THAT MANY COMPANIES ARE NOT OPERATING THE SYSTEMS AS THE DOT WANTS BUT THAT JUST LETS THE COMPANY OFF THE HOOK AND POINTS TO A PROBLEM WITH THE APPLICATION OF THE HOURS OF SERVICE TO THE ELOGS.

I think with the rigid electronic tracking shippers need to be paying detention pay, especially when they do not provide parking if your clock runs out. I think that leaving me without a dispatched load for the night is a different proposition when I can run up the road to a safe comfortable place without breaking open the log book, it is entirely different when I have to stay with the trailer yet cannot operate my vehicle legally as off duty with the trailer. It is just another way of being out of compliance and the ONLY benefit of the system is the peace of mind you get from running legally.

It bothers me to sit MT streetside four miles away from a truckstop simply to make some machine happy and be able to start at the ten hours after sitting at a shipper for hours. I can do it but pay me. It bothers me that I can't run up to a grocery store on a 34 or in the morning without opening my book. These things were perfectly doable and really didn't effect my ability to drive safely. I simply started my book after my errands. More importantly, they made getting small repairs and living a comfortable lifestyle not come out of my 70 hours of work time. It effects lifestyle, health, and takes out of my bottom line.

I can do it and have been but I certainly don't expect to do it for free. Small tweaks on the rules would go a long way while keeping the positive aspects of these systems. However all I hear from companies and goverment is that they don't want to listen, and they just want to talk about how it helps them or how you can run the same amount of miles. ALL I CAN SAY TO THEM IS THAT I DON'T GET PAID BY THE MILE, I GET PAID BY THE LOAD. If they up thier demands then I up mine. It will make people leave the business since it is not as if we are getting rich doing this as it is. More money is the only way for everyone to be happy here and they can pass the cost onto the consumers to pay for it. It should not be coming out of my pocket.

The longer they wait to make the system national and not fix the problems the longer people in complience are not getting paid for this extra work. Let's not even get into how the 3 year record keeping is biased against people who have actually been driving OTR year round vs new drivers or regional drivers who do not risk heavy weather.