Editorial: Reacting to Hours-of-Service Changes

The word that the Department of Transportation is apparently at work on a revision of hours-of-service rules by reducing the number of hours drivers can be on the job has already sparked a flood of reaction inside and outside the industry.

Letters from readers show how intense are the feelings of individuals who earn their living behind the wheel. And trucking managers and owner-operators are no less concerned about the potential ramifications of the proposed changes, which would mandate more off hours for drivers.

No segment of business wants to improve highway safety more than does trucking; after all, the roads are the industry’s workplace. Trucking has made clear that it will embrace programs that lead to fewer accidents and more efficient use of our highways.

The industry bills more than $370 billion a year to move the bulk of the nation’s freight. Government estimates are that the industry, under the current rules, will need about 80,000 new drivers a year to keep pace with current demand. And a new study sponsored by American Trucking Associations projects that truck freight demand will grow by 26% between 1997 and 2007.

We agree that the hours-of-service rules need to be revised. In the 60 years since the work rules were put in place, much has changed. Today’s trucks are easier to drive and have safety systems far beyond what was imaginable in the 1930s. Interstate highways span the nation, replacing the stop-and-go driving of yesteryear.

We now know a lot more about how the human body works, thanks to research by various groups, including the ATA Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Federal Aviation Administration. We have the ability to gauge the impact of proposed rule changes on the human mind and body — before we implement them.

We need new hours-of-service rules, but they must be based on sound science. The government owes it to all who are in trucking — and all who would be directly affected by the changes — to develop a scientific rationale behind any changes it proposes, especially before implementing any of those changes.