truck driver fatigue

truck driver fatigue

When it comes to truck drivers not operating while tired, the responsibility is a two-way street.  The driver must have the full authority to be able to call the shots when it is time for him or her to shut down due to fatigue.  The motor carrier must adhere to the professional drivers’ request, without any repercussion from retaliation measures, such as dispatch forcing them to sit for three days or giving them low mileage and poor paying loads.  When a truck driver is involved in an accident, particularly one that results in fatalities, it is major headline news bringing the spotlight on the driver and the cause often being fatigue.   The spotlight needs to be more on the trucking company and questions asked as to why the driver was operating under such conditions.

It’s time we stop dancing around the facts of why these terrible incidents occur.  Nearly every trucker I know will explain to dispatch that they are too tired to pull a load that they have just been given.  We all know that many dispatchers will whine and plead with the driver that the “load has to get there” and they are the only driver available at that time and place.  If the driver continues his or her stance on being too tired, dispatch will very often turn to the retaliation mode and shut the driver down by making them sit for days incurring no income, provide them with poor paying loads or at worse, find a way to dismiss the driver from their employment.

Professional truck drivers will often find themselves in a position where they must determine whether or not to make the forced run or risk losing the job and their means of support for their families.  This scenario has been going on within the long-haul trucking industry since I can remember, and yet, with all the talk about driver and public safety from the FMCSA, the ATA and every other authoritative figure, no enforcement regulation has ever been designed or even addressed in regards to the responsibility of the motor carrier for bringing an end to this forced dispatching and retaliation against drivers who are only doing what they should do legally . . . if truck drivers feel they are too tired to run a load, they should have the right to say “No” and be allowed to rest without the fear of retaliation.   I have known many drivers who went ahead and took the load, ended up in an accident due to fatigue, and when they made contact with dispatch again, the dispatcher responded with, “Well, you shouldn’t have taken the load if you were too tired.”

Motor carriers can get away with this, simply because nothing is ever recorded or written down as to what conversation between driver and dispatcher went down.  Even with discussion between driver and dispatcher on such equipment as Qualcomm, etc., seldom does the driver have full access to the records.  The fault, in OTR truck driving, will always come back on the driver.  The dispatcher, load coordinator, dispatch supervisor or any company authority figure will never have the character or moral ethics to admit that the wrong-doing came from them . . . it is always the fault of the driver.  Many times, they would rather risk endangering the life of the truck driver and the general public, all for the sake of getting the load picked up and delivered on time.

The FMCSA and the ATA need to step up and address this problem that many trucking companies have in regards to forcing a driver to continue running, even when the driver has expressed, within his or her legal rights, that they are too tired to drive and they need to get sleep and rest.   It’s all about safety, right?   Yesterday, the FMCSA extended the hours of service rule for truck drivers working on the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico.  Although situations such as this is a good way for drivers to make some much needed extra income, who would be held responsible if one of the drivers’ fell asleep at the wheel?   The FMCSA?   The ATA?   The trucking company?  No, I can guarantee you that it would be the truck driver.

The above image is from Houston, Texas where a driver fell asleep at the wheel, careening off the overpass.  Why was the driver so tired that he or she fell asleep?  Are there not regulations for truck drivers requiring them to be given the opportunity for rest?  Of course there are, but these Federal Regulations mean nothing when the driver is faced with forced, retaliation measures from the motor carriers.

It appears to me that safety is the key, only when it mostly benefits the trucking companies and those trucking Associations and Organizations who have the power and political contacts to bring an end to this pushing of drivers who are at the collapsing edge of fatigue.

© 2010, AskTheTrucker. All rights reserved.


Add to Technorati Favorites: , , , , ,

Related posts

Allen Smith

While doing my daily Google news searches I came across an interesting article and video regarding CSA 2010.  The video was made during a Driving for Profit Seminar directed to carriers, telling them about the importance of CSA 2010 and what they will need to focus on if they do not want to receive an unfit SFD ( Safety Fitness Determination Rating)

What surprised me, was that the speaker emphasized that the carriers main focus should be on the driver, not so they can work together in order to avoid violations, but rather to “get them under control”. He went on to tell them that it will be the driver who will ultimately determine the carriers SFD.

Not once does it mention the accountability of the carriers to be compliant.  Rather than me explaining the video, watch it for yourself and see what you think he’s saying and what tactics he’s employing. Again, Drivers will not be rated

I made a comment, but as of yet I have not seen it posted. This is the comment I left on their blog

COMMENT-Allen Smith

I have listened to this video and there are aspects I’d like to address. First I’d like to say that Drivers will NOT BE RATED ( stated in the video), only Carriers. SFD ( Safety Fitness Determination) clearly defines this. It is true that drivers will have scores within the BASIC areas that can be observed, but even those will be limited to who can observe them.
For example, at the weigh stations : the inspector can ONLY see the carriers BASIC safety scores, but not the drivers. The driver data is based on the last 3 and 5 years of road side inspections and crash data. And only that can be seen for them.
The only DRIVER data available to roadside inspectors and future employers ( through a PSP form submitted with permission of the applicant driver) is the 3 and 5 year look back of roadside inspections and DOT recordable accidents.
What this means is that if your company has a high score based on poor past performance, then you have ( and the driver) a greater chance for a roadside inspection.

1) A Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) Rating is only for carriers; The present rating is satisfactory, conditional, and unsatisfactory. The future safety rating will be Continue Operation, Marginal, and Unfit. Again, no such rating for drivers, which means the FMSCA does not “pull a drivers CDL” or “Shut a driver down” as with carriers. The driver can be called in for a government intervention if HIS/HER scores are too high in the BASIC areas which are mostly evident as the Drivers Responsibility. However, even these intervention are most likely going to occur because the Carrier was flagged first.

Next, I would like to say that the statement in this video proclaiming that a carrier’s safety rating is developed by the drivers roadside inspections is misleading. Yes, it is the driver who will be pulled over for an inspection, but violations will not be accounted for by HIS/HER performance only. It is the violations that the company is responsible for ALSO within the 7 BASIC categories
Example: Speeding , reckless driving, improper lane change etc…Is the drivers responsibility. However, there are portions of the scoring violation system that clearly shows aspects of CSA 2010 scoring that THE DRIVER will NOT be held accountable for. Note: The Carrier on the other hand will be responsible for ALL violations, theirs and the driver.

In conclusion I would say it that the carriers need to
:
Keep their equipment in top condition and to make the appropriate repairs when needed. Also, if they do not want to have an Hours of Service violation which is categorized under “Fatigued Driving” then they should notify dispatch that forcing a driver to run illegally in order to make a pick up or delivery will no longer be acceptable. Another note to carriers: When a driver says he does not want to operate the vehicle or trailer because there are mechanical defects, this can no longer be taken lightly. In the past a driver could even be threatened about their job if he/she refused to use equipment that he/she felt would result in a violation if pulled over by DOT. Now the carrier needs to be aware that this behavior is not acceptable. Over weight loads will also be detected and noted and when the drivers advises that the load is overweight, the carrier can no longer dismiss this and force them to run with it anyway.
To say that “the driver is responsible for the development of the carriers score” is actually not creating a true picture of what CSA 2010 is all about. It is actually making carriers accountable for issues in the past that they were not. Carriers will need to LISTEN to the drivers and drivers will need to tell the carriers when things aren’t right and there is a chance for a violation during a roadside inspection. In turn drivers will also need to pay attention to the aspects of CSA 2010 that they are to be held responsible and accountable for.

© 2010, AskTheTrucker. All rights reserved.


Add to Technorati Favorites: , , , , , , ,

Related posts

CDL Federal Gun Law

Due to the controversial topic: “Can CDL Truck Drivers Carry Guns?”, I have researched and found a Federal Law that so many drivers are looking for. Read what an actual Federal Law states about this topic, to put it to rest, once and for all. ( or maybe not)

Provided by Truth About Trucking.

Can a CDL truck driver legally carry a gun in the truck? This is a very HOT topic! In my previous article, “CDL Truck Drivers Carrying Guns,” much controversy was created because nothing could be found anywhere showing any Federal Law stating that it was illegal to carry. I have pointed out that there is NO Federal Law saying that it is illegal, only city, county and state laws that make it illegal to do so, as well as policies set forth by the motor carrier. I have found the actual Federal Law revealing the insight on this subject, listed below:

Title 18 Setcion 926(a). The peacable journey law.

TITLE 18–CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART I–CRIMES

CHAPTER 44–FIREARMS

Sec. 926A. Interstate transportation of firearms

Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or
regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person
who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting,
shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a
firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully
possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully
possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the
firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being
transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the
passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in
the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s
compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked
container other than the glove compartment or console.

OK…now that we have the Federal Law on this matter, what does it mean? I would say that you could give this to 50 attorneys, and all 50 would interpret it differently! I believe what it is saying, is what I originally wrote in my previous articles….a CDL driver may carry a gun in the truck with him or her, PROVIDING that it does not violate any other STATE law, in which the driver will be passing through. Thus my point again…city, county and state laws may be the prevention for CDL truck drivers to carry guns…

Help me out drivers….what do you think?

© 2008 – 2010, AskTheTrucker. All rights reserved.


Add to Technorati Favorites: , , , , , , , , ,

Related posts

Mexican Trucks Not Allowed in U.S.

House Bill H.R. 1773: Safe American Roads Act of 2007 was upheld recently which prohibits the Secretary of Transportation from allowing motor carriers domiciled in Mexico to operate across the border into the United States. President George Bush was in favor of this outrageous proposal and has stated that he will veto it. This is not surprising since President Bush stated on May 30th, 2006 that seventy miles of border fence would be constructed by September 30, 2007.  Well, today is September 30th, 2007 and even though the funds and sources have been appropriated for the border fence, only three miles have been completed.

I have driven in Mexico, hauling dry goods in and out of the country. Mexico basically has no laws governing the commercial motor carrier and their truck drivers. There are no hours of service rules, drivers do not have log books and safety inspection requirements simply do not exist.  Once, while in Monterrey, Mexico a truck in front of me could not get around the “millions” of vehicles in front of him, so he simply drove his rig up over the curb (sidewalk), taking out a street sign, and nobody appeared to even notice! Mexico does not have any EPA laws, so the fumes and smoke from the cars and trucks were blinding.

The senate approved the proposal by a 74-24 vote, delaying the Bush plan to allow Mexican trucks to fill our highways in the United States. Who were the Republican Senators who voted against it? They are listed below in alphabetical order:

Allard (CO)
Bennett (UT)
Bond (MO)
Bunning (KY)
Burr (NC)
Cochran (MS)
Cornyn (TX)
DeMint (SC)

Dole (NC)
Domenici (NM)
Grassley (IA)
Gregg (NH)
Hagel (NE)
Hutchison (TX)
Kyl (AZ)
Lieberman (CT) (Independent)

Lott (MS)
Lugar (IN)
Martinez (FL)

McConnell (KY)
Murkowski (AK)
Stevens (AK)
Sununu (NH)
Vitter (LA)

Two Republicans, Craig of Idaho and John McCain of Arizona must have felt that the safety of the American people was not important of an issue, because they did not even vote! As a Florida resident, it has opened my eyes to the insight of Senator Mel Martinez. If you are from Florida and would like to let Senator Martinez know how you feel you can do so by using the link below:

http://martinez.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInformation.ContactForm

Sometimes I feel as if the entire Presidential election is a scam like over the road trucking. The acts by President Bush and the Republican party seems as if they are purposely attempting to fail in order to bring in a Democratic President. Does the American vote really count anymore? Is the next President already decided by those in extreme power? When you sit back and watch the leaders of our nation do some of the things they do, one has to wonder. The majority of credit has to go to the Democrats on this one . . . they voted to keep America’s roads safe. Now let’s see what President Bush will do . . .

About the Author:

Aubrey Allen Smith is the author of the Truth About Trucking and an expert in motor carrier transportation. Fighting back for our nation’s drivers, he reveals the scams of the truck driving schools and trucking industry. Please visit http://www.truthabouttrucking.com today, to learn more. (Special thanks to my friend Barry for his contribution to this article)

© 2007 – 2008, AskTheTrucker. All rights reserved.


Add to Technorati Favorites:

Related posts