Why CSA 2010 and E-Logs are a good thing.

You've got it . Wannabes just fork out money for school without doing basic research on what the freight volume has been in the past year or whether carriers have increased their fleet size .

 

When I chose this career, there was no worry about being forced into anything. All was good.

 

Drivers will adapt yes but one of the bigger issues is shippers and receivers. Until they get their act together it will be a quagmire. I realize certain loads it will be unavoidable to take time to load or unload but others there's no reason for it to take more than an hour or two to load/unload. Case in point. I picked up a load of big boxed playhouses for delivery to toys r us. It took the shipper less than an hour to load me. I checked in at the receiver at 0630 and was cut loose at 1125. It was a load with less than a dozen separate UPC numbers, all shrinkwrapped on slipsheets. Since they were using power equipment to unload it I see no reason it shoud have taken so long.
.

 

I totally agree, I run into it a lot and i'm a flatbedder. Good example is I loaded up this monday for a load to be delivered thursday morning. Consignee had us make appt times in which I and another driver showed up 15 minutes early for. His was at 7 am and mine at 8 am. Long line of trucks there One was still the 7am appt truck waiting. He goes in 3 2.3 hrs later and make sure someone isnt forgetting us. All the trucks go around us. Our loads were simple, take a forklift and lift off 5 bins on my truck and 6 on his. I go in at 3 hrs of waiting to see whats the hold up ( we have loads waiting for us to be picked up) and they say they are waiting on a flatbed to get the bins transferred over to. I cant believe it WTH? So I make a call and they finally take us in me waiting over 4 hrs and the other driver over 6. These could have just been offloaded onto the ground. They didnt even think twice about it but they would if stiff fines were imposed at 2 hrs and longer of waiting. then we could get somewhere

 

Most newer vehicles come with On Star... I would bet soon all will. Why? They have a vested interest in selling the service. They cannot sell you the service if you vehicle isn't equipped. So your 'choice' may soon be moot. Again, On Star works without you subscribing to it..... another reason they likely will include it on all vehicles... They can sell the data.

Ok back to trucking.

I see a much more sinister use of EOBR's and e-logs data recording. Say your driving your truck and you witness a wreck in close proximity to your tractor/trailer. You are not involved with it at all you, pull over to help if possible... cops arrive and you decide it would be safer if you got rolling again.

The wreck results in a fatality. The family of the deceased hires and attorney to investigate the matter... he does interviews of people involved and finds out the was a Big white Semi tractor/trailer on the scene. Lawyers reaction = Cha Ching! Lawyer calls all EOBR companies for the newly 'mandated' EOBR's and gets DOT #'s the gets e-log data that puts Tazz driving at the scene of this fatal accident... but Tazz didn't have ANYTHING to do with the fatal collision(True). However, the lawyer knows truckers carry greater insurance and has a great interest in showing how Tazz's truck caused the wreck. And the lawyer has EOBR and e-log data to back himself up as the companies galdly sold him the data for a small fee.

Tazz's driving career = Over

Tazz's infraction = Nothing(wrong place wrong time)

But hey, these EOBR's and e-logs are great huh?

 

Your paranoia is showing...Actually "Tazz's" EOBR would show EXACTLY what his vehicle did or did not do and in fact, can protect you in case of an accident. I've had these for 3 years now and their are no "black helicopters" hovering over my house. In case of an accident, their data can actually save your job...What a non issue..And to date, their have been no wrongful lawsuits over anyone stopping for an accident and then being falsely accused. Any attorney would never go there, because the data would prove otherwise. I run EOBR AND a video system tied into the EOBR. No one is spying on me and the system has actually helped prove I was in the right. I guess now we will bring up the whole "freedom/It's a lifestyle/Communist/Socialist" thing now ? You all are just PO'd because it's going to get a lot harder to cheat and you view that as an infringement on your rights. Well, newsflash, myself and millions of other people don't want to be on the same roads with you when you suddenly decide a 160 hour week works for YOU. Deal with it.

 

your a FOOL if you think more govt. is going to make your life better,if im not mistaken our country was founded on less govt........

 

Snowblind, that is the very point so many seem to miss. This includes someone who purports to be a Libertarian, which has the basic tenet of reducing guv'mint to a bare minimum...yet, supports every enactment that comes down the pike that involves ever tightening regulations.

 

You don't have to be on the road... In fact the roads are to crowded now. Might be a good thing. You're jumping the gun thinking the only reason some don't want EOBR AND E-LOGS are because they run illegal. My reason is they are uncalled for period...

 

The only thing an EOBR will show is that you were either in or out of compliance. It won't prevent you from being sued. It won't prevent you from being involved in an accident. It will cost you, or your company thousands of dollars for each truck. That could very well lower your pay since the company has to spend money on new toys for special interest to be happy. You are mistaken when you think that the only reason people oppose EOBR's is because they want to cheat on their logs. Most of us see it for what it really is. It is an unnecessary increase in our operating costs. It is also something that will monitor our every move, when most of us don't want either. I have been an adult for a long time. I have no problem taking responsibility for my own actions. The roads are relatively safe just the way things are. I can see more accidents and problems for those using EOBR's than paper. Major carriers who push this want to limit competition. They understand that smaller fleets and owner operators may have a difficult time paying for the costs of operating under the EOBR's. Someone will need to pay. If this progresses, you could make a fortune by investing in companies who manufacture them. It is like Obamacare. Insurance companies stand to make hundreds of billions of dollars due to a forced mandate. Safe drivers don't need an electronic nanny in the truck with them. Next, they will want camera's installed in the trucks to check for driver fatique. OOPS!!!! I may have given someone an idea.