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

I agree w/Injun on this.Until recently i was employed by Werner.Recently they started paying drivers for clean inspections.Most of their violations were tires,lights,seat belts,and speeding.things that a driver has control of.
Their e-log system IMO sucked.I had them put me on line 3 and 4 on different occasions after I had logged onto line 1 or 2 and wake up to find that I was put in violations.I've been on paper logs for 3 weeks now and haven't had that problem at all.
I had 3 inspections in 5 months solo w/Werner and all were clean.I do my PTI every morning and would never leave w/ a trl.that was in bad shape be it tires,brakes or lights.

 

ECU, you are so naive.

How would an unpopular product become highly profitabe in a short period of time? Mandate its use.

How does a politician get around the "rules?" Dummy corporations and cronies to run them.

Like I said. Follow the money and find out who is in bed with whom.

 

They have the power to change the code specifically FCC rules on airway bandwidth. And it's being done with lobbist groups. Projected frieght moving requirements shows that more trucks will be needed... smaller companies will be required to use EOBR's with more companies popping up... still increases the bottome line of more EOBR's being sold thus increasing profit to technology patent holders.

This is big business folks... again follow the $$$.

 

THEN NAME THEM
quit flailing around like your on channel 19,,at least be factual like you are in your other posts

All i did was post the 3 major brands(there are more dont cha kno)

I dont believe the hype on either side so Naive I think not(maybe in your eyes) but not in mine,,

And while we are on "factual" companies are are put on ELOGS/EOBR's only 2 ways FORCED,I.E.bad scores,,,OR Voluntary,,size has nothing to do with it,,NOT YET,,,right?

 

Wait a minute, just who IS forcing them to be on ELOGS/EOBR's ?

Does it have anyhthing to do with insurance?

Do ANY insurance companies have a vested monitary interest in EOBR technology and patents?

Hmmm? Interesting Huh?

 

We'll have to wait until LaHood steps down to see who his cronies are. I have yet to meet anyone in a position of rulemaking who does not gain some sort of personal advantage from the rules they make. For some, it's simple power. For most, it's money.

I've been alive for 43 years and politically active for over 20. If history is an indicator for the future, you will see I'm not far off the mark.

One of the proposed rules being pushed hard mandates EOBR for large companies regardless of safety rating. The pan is to start there and work their way down. Go ahead and check Swift's rating. You will see the compliance numbers are well below intervention level. Yet, here we are. Placing EOBRs in anticipation of the size matters rule.

 

Yeah I think you made my point,size has nothing to do with it

So if a Insurance Company said your rates would be substantially CHEAPER if you switched to EOBR's I guess it could be looked at either way,,correct?(A choice no less)

FMCSA deems you to have them well you have literally no recoarse(See Gunthers Transport),your scores in reference to your company size COMPARED to same size companies,If your bad,your bad

 

It's not a choice when insurance will no longer carry you... then move to another company right? Wrong, a new company may not offer HazMat bonding ect... They blackmail companies into getting EOBR's in which they have a vested monitary interest in... Specifically, State Farm... Geico(General Electric) and 21st Century.

This is why it is 'forced' on the trucking companies.

 

If these groups think that EOBR's will make roads safer then they should have had a real world study performed before pushing them. They won't, because these EOBR's won't make any difference in safety. It would not surprise me if those involved in these organizations also had a financial interest in the technology. Why would any group or groups push so hard for a technology that is unproven? MONEY!! The only ones who are pushing this technology are the ones who are most likely to be the beneficiaries and will profit from their use.

I don't mind some regulations. But, when a group wants me to spend my money then I want to see a cost/benefit from my investment. Right now, all I see is a cost with NO benefit to me or my business. Log violations have not been a problem with any of my drivers. I know how to draw lines and do basic math, so keeping a legal log book is not a problem for me.

All this discussion is really moot at this point because the bill and/or regulations have been put on hold. I hope it stays that way.

 

BUT,,,
Small problem of United States Code getting in the way of these fine people

FMCSA:http://www.wright.edu/rsp/Security/Ethics/Intro.htm, No one can invest to a company or entity or LAW that they REGULATE[/QUOTE]


Do alittle reshearch on are fine gov and pull your head out of the sand. Gov officials do and can invest and profit from a company they regulate, its one of there perks thats bin going on for years and over looked. Its bin all over the news lately because people and some lawmakers are in an uproar about it. Theres even a bill in the house to stop it but nothing law yet. Stop thinking the gov is your freind and they do no wrong because it is so far from the truth. Its not just gov official eithier, corporate officials do it all the time, some get caught most do not.