Letters to the Editor: Maintenance, Safety, EOBRs
b>Maintenance
There is absolutely no reason for trucks to be doing more than 60 mph on the nation’s highways. They should be fitted with speed limiters immediately — and no truck needs to be in the fast lane, either, unless it’s a “two-laner.”
Frankly, the overall standard of truck repair in the U.S.A. is appalling, especially where alignments, abnormal tire wear and braking systems are concerned. Just look at the running gear when stopped at a light — that tells all to the trained eye.
If you take a look at trailers, the situation is even worse. They are all woefully short of side-impact/underrun repel rails and underrun prevention frames on the rear to protect automobile occupants from severe injury in the event of a collision. Again, when do truck operators pay attention to trailer axle alignment? A quick observation of rigs on the highway shows misalignments of tractor and trailer combinations.
I was in a trailer yesterday for a well-known trucking organization and holes were visible through the trailer bed and the sides were heavily deteriorated. If I had the authority, I would have downed it immediately for safety violations.
I’m disgusted by penny-pinching in Colorado.
Dennis Williams
i>President
inden Engineering Inc.
olden, Colo.
Safety Decisions
I have been driving for more than nine years — safely. This is a fraction of the years of many veteran drivers, but still, how many can say they have never received a speeding ticket or a moving violation or were never involved in a chargeable accident? I can.
One thing that is the key to keeping and maintaining this kind of record is the ability to make my own safety decisions, while delivering the freight on time.
The biggest safety decision I make is when to sleep.
I sleep when I’m sleepy — very simple. Why is it that the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration don’t get it? Why? It’s because they are beholden to mega-corporations and insurance companies. They are the only entities that benefit from the new hours of service.
After many years of bloodshed, through fighting and murder and thousands of Americans dead, the labor law was finally changed in 1931 to eight hours per day for American workers. The exception to this is the truckers, who work in possibly the most dangerous occupation in this country. We are living under an antiquated and repressive system. Deregulation, taken to extremes, results in the loss of individual rights — and that’s exactly what we have.
The new hours of service have nothing whatsoever to do with driver health or public safety. Every aspect of these rules is detrimental to driver health and puts the public (drivers included) at a higher risk of a fatal accident. This is morally wrong and counterproductive.
I don’t need Big Brother to tell me when to be sleepy, when to eat and when to work. I know when I’ve had enough and I know where the parking brake is.
Not every driver is the biological equal of the next driver, and it is not only bad policy, but may be constitutionally wrong to put every driver into the same mold. We are individuals and should be dealt with on that basis first.
I am exploring options now for getting out of the industry. I am completely disgusted. I expect to be replaced with another rookie, or two or three, before the industry gets a driver who can do the job I do, safely. The industry is about to lose another good driver.
I’d just like to see the day when it is legal to drive safely again.
Patricia LaRue
i>Driver
arten
delanto, Calif.
EOBRs, Pro and Con
I am a 40-years-plus veteran of the trucking industry as a driver, operation person and safety, and I cannot help but comment on two letters about electronic onboard recorders in the Jan. 29 issue of Transport Topics. (Click here for previous coverage.)
One letter was from a writer who talked about being in favor of onboard tracking with “stiff enforcement.” That’s OK. Everyone in America is still entitled to espouse his or her opinion, no matter how off-track and erroneous it may be.
The other letter made the case about EOBRs about as well as it could be made. That writer summed up the real issue on this matter when stating: “The proposed mandatory use of EOBRs is not for safety . . .”
The first letter writer discussed drivers being forced to run over-hours. This is incorrect and an impossibility. Drivers use the F-word — “forced” — as an excuse to violate a law they do not like (and is wrong and unfair). They make a conscientious decision whether or not to break this law, just as they do all the other laws.
I have asked many drivers over the years to answer the following little question-scenario: The dispatcher tells you they have a really hot load and want you to drive non-stop for the next 12 hours, as fast as the truck will run. Do not stop for any red lights or stop signs, and especially do not take any breaks. Do not pay attention to any speed limits, or slow down in any towns. Are you going to do it?
The answer is always no, accompanied by comments like, “That would be dangerous,” “That is crazy” or “I would never do that,” and so forth.
And the follow-up question is: Then why do you violate the hours-of-service regulations? Is it because that is what it takes? Or even if some dispatcher is stupid enough to tell you directly to run over hours?
The real question is why the rules are there, and more important, why are they enforced? Again, my opinion is basically in agreement with the second letter-writer. The rules were needed when implemented. They are well-intentioned and are for safety.
The problem is they have gotten out of control. Enforcement is being abused and has turned into a profit center for some enforcement agencies.
Loyd Wallace
i>Owner
A Consulting Services
owell, Ark.
These letters appear in the Feb. 19 print edition of Transport Topics. Subscribe today.
