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

Having an EOBR would not have prevented any of those accidents. I am not familiar with any of those accidents other than the one in Florida. With that guy he had been off duty but had not rested. If he had a EOBR he would have been considered rested or at least have sufficient hours to begin his day. When you mention a tanker, I assume it had gasoline or other flameables. Most of those drivers are local. Having an EOBR would have done nothing to have prevented the accident.

People make mistakes. The less experience the greater chance the driver has of making a mistake and becoming involved in an accident.

I have seen 4 wheelers cross the median and hit another 4 wheeler or 18 wheeler head on. If they 18 wheeler was over on his hours the lawyer for the 4 wheeler will make a case that if the driver had not been over on his hours that he would not have been in that place at the time his client crossed the median and hit him. It is the fault of the trucker that the 4 wheeler crossed the median and killed himself. In truth, over 3/4 of all accidents involving trucks are the fault of 4 wheelers. There are many times more accidents involving 4 wheelers and no trucks that have devastating results. EOBR's would not have had any effect on preventing those accidents. Recording driving times will do absolutely nothing to keep roads safe. Only drivers can make roads safer. It is a real stretch to assume that putting EOBR's in all trucks will make roads safer. The proof is not there. It would be much easier to make a case for the opposite.

 

Seriously?? 50 years after seatbelts were made mandatory for safety reasons and someone still thinks their use should be voluntary? Wow.

 

You make valid points, G/Man and others. Regulations are written and implemented for the larger good, not for the good or detriment of the individual. I wonder, though--how many of you and your driver colleagues took the time to write your complaints about EOBR or anything where it can help...your elected representatives and the DOT? Grousing is a healthy, all-American freedom, but it will not get any regulatory agency to change. Or even listen. And about THAT, I do know.

 

So no laws pertaining to trucking at all? None no restrictions on driving speed?

Tell me when I see the half asleep ahole about to kill himself and innocents in your world am I allowed to defend my self and others from his assault?








Now driving restrictions do reduce the risk of accidents. If they did not accidents would have sky rocketed when they first implemented them, gone stratoshperic when they changed the sleeper split.......


None of that happened and everyone knows it. QED HOS is about safety period.

All CMV's will have EOBR's. So yeah the locals will be in better compliance as well. But the tanker was one of those O/O billy big riggers been running that way since Lincoln was sentanced for his crimes. Guess he found out the hard way 15 hours behind the wheel was a little much. However like I said at least he only killed himself.

Florida guy was found to be in violation.


http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/fulltext/HAB0805.htm


So maybe not being able to use that eraser, and management allowing them to" git er done" of two rounds a day seven young children just might have been graduating soon.

 

I am amazed by the distance between driver stances. I fully understand folks that. Don't agree with my views, I'm not a driver. But amongst the drivers that post on here I'm surprised there is such a divide. I almost understand the reluctancy to have mandatory eLogs, almost. The argument about greater compliance leads to improved safety carries some weight, but being compliant doesn't ensure you are a safe driver. Safety is an act based off of the choices you make it has little to do with compliance. Compliance is just following the regulations set before you.

So for those of you that want to follow your own hours to be safer more power to ya. I think dispatch should work the hours that work the best for them. I think breakdown should work just when they feel like it and if they need a nap they should take a nap. If a driver is found to be harassing the company his number should be blocked and his sat communications should be turned off.

We can't always get what we want, all we can do is follow the expectations set before us.

 

Humans are homeostatic beings, meaning we do not like change. Some of us embrace it better than others, but we all resist and in industries that go through significant changes like trucking is now, that resistance can be significant. Couple it with the difference between "old" truckers and "new" truckers and you can see one factor in the divide. It's good to voice those differences.

 

You're not familiar with the one in Florida either "http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/1087-ntsb-driver-in-deadly-crash-awake-34-hours/"
Yes , an EOBR would have kept him from driving that many hours . If you aren't familiar with the other cases how can you say an EOBR wouldn't have prevented them ?

 

Its a sad state when everybody and their dogs thinks THEY KNOW HOW TO RUN YOUR BUSINESS! The government has no more RIGHT to introduce most of these laws than I would to fly the space shuttle. Its thinking like yours that has infected this once great country. Be a man worry about yourself. Take pride in YOUR work not how much you THINK YOU KNOW ABOUT SOMEONE ELSES. I feel for ya but I also know that responding to someone as brainwashed as you is pointless. Get educated

 

Whether to wear seatbelts should be a personal decision. There are some accidents where drivers have been killed wearing seatbelts when they might have lived had they not had them on. There have also been accidents where people have been killed who are not wearing a seatbelt. Wearing seatbelts might be a good idea, but it should not be up to the government to make laws concerning individual freedom and choice. It was the insurance industry that pushed for seatbelt use legislation. And it hasn't been 50 years since they were made mandatory. Auto manufacturers began to put seatbelts in cars in the late 1960's, but the government didn't mandate that they install them until the late 1960's. We had them in cars for a number of years before legislation was passed that forced drivers to use them. It was state governments that passed legislation that required mandatory seat belt use starting in the mid 1980's.

Seatbelts very well could help people survive an automobile accident. It depends on the accident. Even if true, it should still be an individual decision and not mandated by the government. Just because something might be a good idea doesn't necessarily mean that we need to government to force us to comply.

 

Regulations are presented as being for the greater good. That may or may not be true. Often, it is for the benefit of the few. I am not necessarily against all regulations. As I have previously stated I have made my views known to my legislators and regulators (DOT and others) on a number of occasions. When Alexander and Pryor introduced the bill to require EOBR's, I called both offices and expressed my views and got a different answer from both as to why EOBR's were a good idea. I have also expressed my views on other issues, such as changes to the hos. I knew my previous congressman for almost 2 decades and expressed my views on a number of issues. I have known both senators for over 20 years. I am not as well acquainted with my current congressman, but am getting to know him and do make my views known.

When legislation comes up I have no problem posting my views and contacting my elected representatives. I grew up in a family that got involved in things. I will get involved in issues other than trucking, too. I understand that I am probably in the minority about getting involved and expressing my views to my representatives, but whether my views prevail or not, I will make them known to those who can.