Are you being macromanaged?

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
It would be a little tighter than I would personally care for .... but it could be done (safely and on time ;)) ...... depending on how rested you were when you got the call ......

yes it is spot on schedule...but one can build up a good cushion for breaks over the extended miles...especially if one is starting off well rested...weather not included..
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
These are awfully strong words of condemnation. I challenge you to produce statistics backing up any carnage, any whatsoever, of expedite van drivers. I understand FedEx and Panther drivers are strangled by company policy. Yet, the facts do not show any truth to assertions that expedite van drivers at small carriers which allow drivers to police themselves through common sense have a higher rate of accidents.

I submit any driver who is morbidly obese is a much greater danger to public safety on the highways. In fact, CSA 2010 intends to address this very situation of dangerous fat people behind the wheel. Perhaps, stupid can be fixed through CSA 2010.

I've seen skinny guys drop dead at age 46 for no apparent reason...I am officially obese but my blood pressure and heart has all checked out fine....glad I am not covered in the CSA... the BMI might be an indicator of obestity but does not cover risk.

The medical group has a risk assessment chart...which is a collage of info from HDL, LDL, Blood pressure, weight, whether a smoker or not and some other factors that determine risk....
a 5 is considered healthy....I was a 7.7 but am now down to a 6.1 and dropping...:D
 

aristotle

Veteran Expediter
I've seen skinny guys drop dead at age 46 for no apparent reason...I am officially obese but my blood pressure and heart has all checked out fine....glad I am not covered in the CSA... the BMI might be an indicator of obestity but does not cover risk.

The medical group has a risk assessment chart...which is a collage of info from HDL, LDL, Blood pressure, weight, whether a smoker or not and some other factors that determine risk....
a 5 is considered healthy....I was a 7.7 but am now down to a 6.1 and dropping...:D
OVM... it is good to see you are proactive in moving towards good health. Even the smallest improvement in overall health makes a difference. A sick or medically challenged driver could pose a greater risk to highway safety. I wish you, and all EO members, all possible success in achieving better health.
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
OVM... it is good to see you are proactive in moving towards good health. Even the smallest improvement in overall health makes a difference. A sick or medically challenged driver could pose a greater risk to highway safety. I wish you, and all EO members, all possible success in achieving better health.

Thanks..:)

It is a struggle....I just think the BMI in itself does not tell the whole story...many factors as I pointed out should be used,,especially if it could lead to taking ones chosen career away...
 

moose

Veteran Expediter
. "I challenge you to produce statistics backing up any carnage, any whatsoever, of "... "any driver who is morbidly obese is a much greater danger to public safety on the highways. In fact",...

You will not find any statistic ,,, yet CSA2010 will send them and their family's from the drivers seat to the wealthcare line...
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
First, unplugging the QC to deliberately deceive the carrier is grounds for having your contract canceled. I know several to whom this has happened, and for the very reason that was illustrated in this thread.

I can run 1500 miles no problem with maybe a 20 minute power nap. So, why should my carrier limit me?
The carrier would, and should, limit you because no matter how much you protest, it's still highly unlikely that you are the only person on the planet who safely can run a 1500 miles trip straight through on only a 20 hour power nap.

As a side note, I have a friend who proudly proclaims that she is an excellent driver, simply because she has never gotten a ticket nor has ever had an accident. Just the same, she's one of the worst, and most unsafe drivers I know.

When you are on a long run and take a significant break early in the load, even though you can make up that time over distance and still deliver the load on time, many carriers have learned this is not always the case, and they have been burned with late deliveries too many times, even by drivers who have never been late, to take the chance. Therefore, they'll swap the load out, which gives them significantly better chances of seeing their freight delivered on time.

Incidentally, if a drywall contractor who works 20 hours straight causes the contractor or the customer money or increased liability, then the contractor will have two choices, find a drywall subcontractor who won't cost any undue additional money, or put a policy in place to control the subcontractor to prevent him from costing too much to have under contract.

Carriers are in business for one reason, and one reasons only, to do what is in their best interest to service the customer. If you say you can deliver a particular load on time, even if you can and almost certainly would, history has shown the carrier that their computer is right more often than the drivers are, and if their computer disagrees with you, they will go with their computer. They will go with whatever option that gives them the best historical probability of getting the load delivered safely, legally and on time, regardless of what a driver says.

What this means is, if you want to be successful, you must work within the constraints of your carrier's policies, as you will have little to no chance of changing them. It means that if you get offered a long load, and you take a break early in the load, or don't have enough hours per policy, and will be showing late if you take a break, the load is gonna swap. OK, now, knowing that (and disconnecting the QC is a really good indication that you know that), it means that if you take the load knowing it will swap, and you don't want it swapped, then you shouldn't have taken the load. If you need a 2 hour break before your scheduled 4 hour break, but continue to drive, anyway, to prevent the load from swapping, then you are intentionally driving stoopid and deserve to be highly regulated.

Imagine I'm with my friends carrier and I have been up since 6 o'clock in the morning waiting for a load. The day has been pretty mild weathered so I have had no need to start up my truck and dispatch has no way of telling how long i've been awake. Lets say I get a load offer at 7 o'clock at night and it has to go 700 miles in 20 hours. What if I take that load and then decide to run 10 hours and take a 2 hour break? Well, I would get a message that I have not taken a full four hour break and would be swapped because I had burned up most of my 16 hour clock. Do I just run the load straight through, or do I tell them to swap me out at 600 miles?
You should have been honest with them, and yourself, right up front when you were offered the load. If you've been up since 0600 there is no way you can safely take a load at 1900 of more than about 300 miles driving distance before having to take a break. If that 700 mile load doesn't have enough time for that break built into it from the start, then you should turn that load down and take the next one, or tell them up front that the load will need to be swapped. It's just a load, and I can't think of a single load that's worth becoming stupid for.

This is a business where you are paid per unit. In our case it is the miles that are the units. The more units that you produce; Ie, miles that you run, the more money you earn. If you can't pull thousand milers overnight at least once or twice a month, you are simply in the wrong business. But you need to be able to do it on your own terms; not the companies terms.
The only way you can do it on your own terms is to have your own authority. Otherwise, you have no choice but to defer to the authority under which you are operating. It's flat out that simple.
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Stories like this are EXACTLY why some people NEED to be 'Macro-Managed', and even need to be MICRO-managed... and are also why eventually we will be forced to log.

Truckers used to run 1000 miles or more at a time too.... and took drugs to stay awake, drugs to sleep, and the death tolls told the story. Therefore we have more safety regulations, EOBR, HOS etc... when a group of people CANNOT or WILL NOT police themselves to provide service safely, then the rules get tighter. People who did this stuff, and caused accidents and deaths are EXACTLY the reason we now have the stronger governmental oversight they love to complain about.. and they are the reason these companies now cover their but by regulating more breaks, etc...


You can't fix stupid.


Dale

These are awfully strong words of condemnation. I challenge you to produce statistics backing up any carnage, any whatsoever, of expedite van drivers. I understand FedEx and Panther drivers are strangled by company policy. Yet, the facts do not show any truth to assertions that expedite van drivers at small carriers which allow drivers to police themselves through common sense have a higher rate of accidents.

I submit any driver who is morbidly obese is a much greater danger to public safety on the highways. In fact, CSA 2010 intends to address this very situation of dangerous fat people behind the wheel. Perhaps, stupid can be fixed through CSA 2010.

I have no reams of statistics showing expedite van drivers have killed numerous people. I have enough common sense to know that nobody can drive 4 digit mileage straight through in a safe manner. Nobody. Not even the generic "you" whoever that might be. That's 24 hours straight and nobody can do that. Now, they may get it done and manage it without causing serious harm but they aren't getting it done in a fully safe manner. Far more studies than needed to prove conclusively have shown that even extending work hours from 8 to 12 hour shifts results in a marked and recordable deterioration of work output quality.

Nobody wants to be restricted or told what to do. That's human nature. Everybody wants to think they are fully capable and immune to problems that might face "mere mortal" commoners. That's human nature. None of that changes the fact that neither the human body nor the human mind can do a 1xxx mile drive with full safety.

Some will overextend due to ego and some will overextend due to finances. Those are the two main reasons people operate in an unsafe manner, regardless of truck size. Vanners are just able to go farther down either of those paths due to the absence of HOS rules. Yes, people need to be micromanaged. Not all people but some of them, the problem being identifying and knowing which ones. The only way to manage the ones who require it is to manage everyone.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Hark .... I hear the Voice of Liberty calling:

"O' foolish driver-folk ...... you actually believe that YOU are capable of making your own decisions and acting in responsible manner with regard to your fellows ?

Surely, you jest .......

Put on your chains and shackles willingly .... yea, even gladly ....... for they are not really chains, but fine jeweled bracelets .... designed to identify you as a member of the enslav ..... err, I mean brethren .....

Seek not to take responsibility for your own condition and actions ... don't bother your head with such burdens .... for, in our vast wisdom, we know best what is good for one and all ....."


Yes, people need to be micromanaged. Not all people but some of them, the problem being identifying and knowing which ones. The only way to manage the ones who require it is to manage everyone.
Sounds like that premise would make a really great case for gun control .... :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Hark .... I hear the Voice of Liberty calling:
In this business, Liberty depends on who's authority you are running under.

If it's your authority, then whatever happens is solely your responsibility, but if you're running under someone else's authority, there ya go. You can willingly put on the chains and shackles of a lease agreement and choose to run under another's authority, with all the constraints and benefits of doing so, or you can remain totally free with your own authority, complete with all the benefits and risks of doing so. It's up to you, but you can't have it both ways.
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
In this business, Liberty depends on who's authority you are running under.

If it's your authority, then whatever happens is solely your responsibility, but if you're running under someone else's authority, there ya go. You can willingly put on the chains and shackles of a lease agreement and choose to run under another's authority, with all the constraints and benefits of doing so, or you can remain totally free with your own authority, complete with all the benefits and risks of doing so. It's up to you, but you can't have it both ways.

That was exactly my point....;)
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
That was exactly my point....
It wasn't mine however ..... I was merely commenting on the mindset of some who would actually prefer to be regulated .... (musta been a strong attachment to the nanny back there or somethin')

I guess it's something about those who would willingly trade there freedom for security deserving neither ..... or something like that :rolleyes:

And yes Virginia, I can have it both ways - by signing a lease agreement with a carrier who doesn't over-regulate me with respect to things I don't wanna be regulated on ....
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
And yes Virginia, I can have it both ways - by signing a lease agreement with a carrier who doesn't over-regulate me with respect to things I don't wanna be regulated on ....
Well, that's not really having it both ways, though. That's merely picking a carrier who regulates you in a manner with which you agree. You're still being regulated by the policies of their authority, and if you go outside of their policies, they'll let you know right quick that you're not having it both ways. Like I said, you're either you're running under your own authority and all of the freedoms and risks that come with it, or you are running under someone else's authority and policies. If you're running for someone else, it's just a matter of degrees of regulation and whether or not you can run within their constraints. Just because you're being regulated happily, doesn't mean you're not being regulated.

Every carrier has policies or makes decisions that a driver will not agree with. The question becomes, do the ones that you agree with outweigh the ones you do not agree with? That's not having it both ways as much as it is picking the right carrier for you, the one with the least objectionable warts. Because often, those warts go bone deep.
 

aristotle

Veteran Expediter
It wasn't mine however ..... I was merely commenting on the mindset of some who would actually prefer to be regulated .... (musta been a strong attachment to the nanny back there or somethin')

I guess it's something about those who would willingly trade there freedom for security deserving neither ..... or something like that :rolleyes:

And yes Virginia, I can have it both ways - by signing a lease agreement with a carrier who doesn't over-regulate me with respect to things I don't wanna be regulated on ....

RLENT... the howls of protest coming from FedEx and Panther drivers are deeply rooted in jealousy. Because they willingly submit to arbitrary constraints, they wish for everyone else to be likewise limited. They cloak their protest in a pretense to "safety." In reality, their concerns are the freedoms and economic advantages we presently enjoy. There are tired drivers at every carrier. Those of us who police ourselves are doing just fine. I admit, the whining coming from FedEx and Panther drivers is rather arrogant. Obama would be proud of these whiners. Maybe they can get a union started.
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
RLENT... the howls of protest coming from FedEx and Panther drivers are deeply rooted in jealousy. Because they willingly submit to arbitrary constraints, they wish for everyone else to be likewise limited. They cloak their protest in a pretense to "safety." In reality, their concerns are the freedoms and economic advantages we presently enjoy. There are tired drivers at every carrier. Those of us who police ourselves are doing just fine. I admit, the whining coming from FedEx and Panther drivers is rather arrogant. Obama would be proud of these whiners. Maybe they can get a union started.

you noticed eh?
We are controlled and so should everyone,
Lets level the playing field....
all are the cries of the subdued and chained...

You run your business and I'll run mine...:cool:
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
A bit of strawman premise to be sure ..... :rolleyes:

Like I said, you're either you're running under your own authority and all of the freedoms and risks that come with it, or you are running under someone else's authority and policies.
Not necessarily exactly or entirely true - because sometimes, some carriers, don't define policies with respect to certain things ... and if I'm leased on to one of them, at that point I have the freedom (there's that dirty little word again) to define my own policy.

If you're running for someone else, it's just a matter of degrees of regulation
It's always a matter of degrees of regulation - whether you run for someone else or under your own authority - it is, afterall, a regulated industry .... :rolleyes:

Just because you're being regulated happily, doesn't mean you're not being regulated.
Well actually, with respect to the subject at hand (limitations on hours of driving, enforced rest breaks, etc) I'm not being regulated at all ...... except by myself (..... OH MY ! .... the utter horror of it !)

Like I said, my point was merely to comment on the mindset of some who would actually prefer to be regulated (and demand that others are as well) - apparently to the point of having more regulation than what in some instances is actually even present ....

You can try to redefine what I said to mean what you want it to mean, but in the end I said what I said, and intended exactly what I intended ....

I understand your point and have no disagreement with it - being leased on and running under someone's else authority can place limitations on the freedom one enjoys - that is certainly true ....

Now understand mine: some carriers permit more individual liberty than others do - although some would prefer that were not the case apparently.
 
Last edited:

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
RLENT... the howls of protest coming from FedEx and Panther drivers are deeply rooted in jealousy.
Oh, I understand ... really, I do :D

Because they willingly submit to arbitrary constraints, they wish for everyone else to be likewise limited. They cloak their protest in a pretense to "safety." In reality, their concerns are the freedoms and economic advantages we presently enjoy.
I am forever amazed at the never-ending desire on the part of some to attempt to deny freedom to others .... in almost all areas of Life, and under all manner of pretense ....

There are tired drivers at every carrier. Those of us who police ourselves are doing just fine.
So it would seem ....

Ya know, the funny thing is that the entire premise is somewhat ludicrous .... think about it: the responsible will do the right thing - regardless of whether there are rules or regulations his conduct - because they are responsible .....

On the otherhand, do ya really think that making the truly irresponsible take a rest break at some arbitrary time, or limiting his loads to a certain length, is going to make the guy go to sleep and get rested ? Really ?

Ya really think he won't stay up and play on the Nintendo, or computer ..... or whatever .... and then accept a load he shouldn't because he's not rested enough ? Really ?

Substituting rules, regulations, and laws for personal responsibility will never, ever be a solution .... because the responsible are inherently responsible, and the irresponsible will always find a way to get around whatever barrier is attempting to be imposed ....

I admit, the whining coming from FedEx and Panther drivers is rather arrogant. Obama would be proud of these whiners. Maybe they can get a union started.
Ain't gonna touch that one .... ;)
 
Last edited:

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
Rlent..Aristotle..Bang on..:D..to those who would like me to be bridled with YOUR rules.....here is raspberries to you....:p
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
RLENT... the howls of protest coming from FedEx and Panther drivers are deeply rooted in jealousy. Because they willingly submit to arbitrary constraints, they wish for everyone else to be likewise limited.

Far be it from me to defend Panther, but, uhm, "arbitrary" constraints?

Granted, I'm not intimately familiar with each and every one of the definitions of "arbitrary", but as far as I know, "something I don't understand or agree with" isn't one of them. Unreasonable is one of them, and not agreeing with it doesn't make it unreasonable, either. Unsupported is one of them, and I guarantee you Panther can, absolutely, support their decision to limit cargo vans. The rules for limiting cargo vans are in black and white and are not applied in an arbitrary manner, either.

When the carrier gets sued because a van driver kills someone after driving for longer than a certain time (which has happened twice that I know of), and when freight ends up being delivered late by a driver who didn't properly police themselves and ended up oversleeping while on a break (which has, in fact, happened to people who will tell you straight up that they've never been late), the case for regulating a cargo van is both supported and reasonable, and not at all arbitrary.

As for being economically disadvantaged, thank you for opening my eyes. I had no idea I was broke and doing so poorly.
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Driving is a privilege. Gun ownership is a right. Apples and orangutans.
 
Top