AMonger
Veteran Expediter
No, I need more fellow citizens who appreciate freedom and prefer it over servitude, no matter how much safer servitude is.
Fun with deputies
- Thread starter AMonger
- Start date
No, I need more fellow citizens who appreciate freedom and prefer it over servitude, no matter how much safer servitude is.
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
Of course. That's what I've been saying the whole time.
Look, the fact that vans aren't regulated like trucks is the ràison dê etre of CVs. It's our USP--our Unique Selling Proposition, the thing that makes CVs different than and preferable to trucks in many situations. You need those skids in Poughkeepsie in 20 hours? We'll have it there. The LTL people can't do it, regulated trucks can't do it, but a van can. THAT'S THE POINT OF A CARGO VAN IN THIS INDUSTRY. It's 1000 miles, but we'll get it there, straight through. THAT'S THE POINT. If that's curtailed, the van segment of the industry may as well not exist. Long distances without the regulation IS THE POINT.
Weeeeelllll, it may be ONE point, but it's far from THE point. If most expedite loads were 1000 miles or more, you'd have a good argument, but the fact is most expedite loads are 400 miles or less, concentrated in the Midwest, with an average length of line haul in the 300-to-400 mile range. 20 hours to Poughkeepsie is a piece of cake in a regulated truck with a team at the wheel, or for a van, so in the majority of freight hauls, whether it be to Poughkeepsie or Petoskey, HOS or lack thereof is not a determining factor. It's about shipping rates, and it's cheaper to expedite a couple of skids in a van than it is to ship the same freight in an exclusive-use truck.
You'll have to ignore Greg somewhat on the van and logging issue. He likes to scare van drivers into thinking they will have to start logging and scaling, any day now, probably tomorrow, if not yesterday. He tries to make them think they are regulated by the DOT, same as any other truck. He is of a like mind with many straight and tractor drivers who think that if they have to log and scale, by golly by gum van drivers should, too, dammit, because they haul freight, and that's what matters most. If you haul freight, you have to log. Or dаmned well should. So there.
You'll have to ignore Greg somewhat on the van and logging issue. He likes to scare van drivers into thinking they will have to start logging and scaling, any day now, probably tomorrow, if not yesterday. He tries to make them think they are regulated by the DOT, same as any other truck. He is of a like mind with many straight and tractor drivers who think that if they have to log and scale, by golly by gum van drivers should, too, dammit, because they haul freight, and that's what matters most. If you haul freight, you have to log. Or dаmned well should. So there.
Well, I would like to see the herd thinned in the van division, and it will happen if vans become regulated. But then, the problem that we will be facing is that we don't have a DOT approved sleeper. And we won't be able to afford a hotel room after each 11 hours of driving.
Posted with my Droid EO Forum App
Posted with my Droid EO Forum App
Well I don't know how any of the responses to your actions can be seen as servitude, but again the paranoia is seeping through.
Next time, why not have some real fun with the cops and pour a beer all over your jacket before you walk into the truck stop? Or put a bit of icing sugar into a plastic Baggie and accidentally drop it in front of him while you're paying for your corn dog?
It's fun!
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Don't tell people to ignore me.
To many reading these posts, you are speaking for EO because you are a moderator, no matter who says otherwise. This is more or less the impression that has been given in a lot of posts and backed up by actions of you and others. And this impression applies to more than just you.
If there is a question about why it appears this way or legitimate reason for us not to believe it is so for the general reader (member or lurker), then a strong suggestion to Lawrence and on-time administration to address it off line or out of the view of the general population to find a solution and not to be addressed by you or any other moderator because IT IS NOT YOUR PLACE.
My first post was a warning, my second post is just an addition to Phil's and reality is that the FMCSA doesn't have to justify through either their rule making process or by their safety stats in order to change what defines a commercial vehicle.
AMonger, if vans go away, then it is not a big deal in the bigger picture. Van freight is a very very small portion of the freight moved and if there is a need to get two skids from LA to Chicago in twenty hours there are solutions for it - higher rates that are justifiable.
The problem is that many van people think they are indispensable when they are not.
Just look at the way the freight is acquired and look at the dock sitting times on some of the freight and you can see where the urgency is.
We no longer live in the past where we have had 100 manufacturing plants that had to be serviced, but now we live in a world where someone in their PJ's sitting on their bed with two cell phones and a laptop so they can run an effective carrier making good profits with a few vans and a couple trucks without meeting or making cold calls to drum up business (this is actually true).
You can turn that around and ask, why should big truck drivers be required to log at all? If cargo vans haul freight and are not required to log, why should big trucks that haul freight be required to log?
Logging has been in place so long and is such a part of a CMV driver's daily routine that we tend to accept the requirement without question. We may argue about 10 or 11 hours and about split sleeper berth times, but we generally do not argue about having some sort of hours of service rule in place.
Let's think about that for a moment. What would the world look like if no HOS rules existed? What would it be like if big truck drives were as free to operate their rigs as cargo van drivers are?
If it is OK for cargo van drivers who haul freight for pay to not log, why should big truck drivers who do the same thing log? What's the difference?
tenntrucker
Expert Expediter
There's really not a difference, both haul cargo for a living. I don't see much difference between a T/T to S/T than S/T to van.
Sent from my DROID X2
Last edited:
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
Geez, this again?
Turtle, if you wouldn't mind... I know I could probably find your explanation in the archives, and if I were on my laptop, I might try.
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
I'd say it's the primary point. I know that big trucks can be moved for the same or not much more than a van. When I was driving big trucks, the same disputes were going on, about how/why drivers would accept cheap freight, and I know some were taking freight for van rates. So if a shipper searches he can find a big truck to move a couple skids cheap. He just can't find one to move it that quickly, legally, without the risk of being shut down by the DOT.
I remember the days of what you're describing, mileage-wise. I used to run for one of the big boys, and for a while, I was wearing ruts into I-94 between chitown and Detroit, and various other automotive lanes, 250-450 at a time, most of the time. If we got that run to the Ford plant in NJ or St. Paul, it felt like a long run.
Now, I do hardly any automotive, less than 20%, easily, and my average LOH is far higher. I frequently have several runs in a row longer than your company will let you do without a break. Last week, I did, consecutively, (2) 950 milers and the 1200. That's not an isolated instance; they frequently cluster like that for some reason.
Oh, I've enjoyed your debates with him over the difference between a CV and a CMV. In fact, please post it again and make it a sticky so it can be found easily.
I don't ignore Greg; but I know what's coming from him any time any regulation is brought up, which is, the more of it, the better. He reminds me of a friend in the military who said that basic training wasn't hard enough, and that the instructors should have been allowed to throw us through windows. But with Greg, it's how we should have to produce any record the gummint wants and even drop our pants for an invasive search and measurement. I know it's coming from him the same way everybody knows I'm going to hammer on the cops.
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
Well, then, let's do so...
Last time I read the Bill of Rights, it said no one could be compelled to testify against themselves. The Supreme Court has ruled that this applies to every situation in which a penalty might result from information you're compelled to give the government. It goes so far as the right to remain silent being upheld at border crossings, that you don't have to answer the questions of the pretend cop at the border when they ask where you've been and why.
And last I knew, there were/are potential penalties for what you put down in your logbook. And, last I heard, the amendment prohibiting the government from requiring us to testify against ourselves did notend with unless we want to or unless we feel there's a compelling reason. Or did the Founding Fathers write it in invisible ink, visible only to SCOTUS?
Monty
Expert Expediter
Well, some of us do! I love my Sprinter conversion ....
On the van logging and scaling issue, unless and until you quit trying to scare van drivers with bad and incorrect advice about logging, scaling, DOT regulations, having to prove they've slept and other assorted crap, I'll continue to tell people to ignore you on those issues.
Moderators deal with the forums and only the forums, and have nothing whatsoever to do with anything else on the EO site nor with On-Time Media. Moderators don't speak for EO unless it deals with the Code of Conduct or something else that directly affects the forums. On every forum on the Net there will be those who think a Moderator carries more authority than it does, just as there will be those who think a Moderator has little or no real authority at all. Can't please everybody.
You keep using "it" as if someone besides you actually knows what "it" means. What the heck are you talking about? It appears, not to believe it, address it, it is not your place? Are all of these "it"s referring to the same "it"? If there is a question about WHAT appearing this way, or a legitimate reason for us to not believe WHAT? What, exactly, is Lawrence and On-Time Media admins supposed to address?
Ever since I've been reading EO, which is about a year before I joined, you've been on a "vans should log" kick. You've used all kinds of reasons why, some at least made logical and common sense, others made no sense at all, but in most cases you did not reference the actual rules and regulations for justifications, and used your own personal preferences and wishes instead. If you think there needs to be a behind the scenes discussion and consensus every time someone posts something of questionable accuracy or advice so that it can officially be addressed, think again.
They didn't make me a Moderator in order to shut me up. If I see something that I feel needs to be addressed, it is precisely my place to address it. It's also anyone else's place to address it.
According to federal law, they absolutely do, on both counts. And the courts have reiterated that fact on several occasions. Your first post wasn't as much of a warning as it was a statement to scare van drivers into thinking that if they take a long load and get into an accident, and there's no proof that they've slept, that it will be way worse for them than if they had an accident after getting plenty of sleep, which is a load of crap, as most lawyers will bleed you and your company dry under any circumstances if they can.
Monty
Expert Expediter
Correct, and you have the option to NOT to be in the regulated endeavor, problem solved.
Greg, I agrre with you about moderators representing EO, but me thinks you do protest too much. Just my humble opinion.
Remember, "Those looking to be offended, soon will be!"
As an example, Turtle kinda jumped me for asking when the EO show was on RoadDog on XM ... that reflected badly on him for not providing the information, and the origianl intent was to perhaps prompt Lawerence to include such information in future posts. But I was not offended. I just brushed it off and went on.
Pardon my ignorance. I have paid little attention to vans over the years and know little about them. I skip over most posts having to do with vans so if this has been discussed before, I missed it.
As I said above, your post about your being tired after a long run and taunting a deputy got me interested in van HOS and safety issues. There is no need to cover old ground on my account. If previous discussions on the topic exist, I'd be grateful to anyone who posts links to them.
It's not really a turnaround, it's the question big truck drivers have been asking for a long time. The reason drivers of heavy vehicles and buses need to log is because the FMCSA and law enforcement found out that drivers will lie through their teeth about their Hours of Service and how much rest they've during a given time period. Logging gives Vehicle Enforcement a means of verifying that a driver is abiding by the HOS rules.
But the question really isn't, "Why should big trucks that haul freight be required to log?", the question is, "Why should big trucks be required to log?"
Hauling freight has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
Look at history, where we didn't have any HOS rules, and drivers were taking narcotics to stay awake, where, "If the wheels ain't turnin' you ain't earnin'" wasn't just a saying, it was a way of life. Truckers howled when lower speed limits were put in place during the energy crisis of the 70's, saying that they were more fuel efficient running in 97th gear at 80 MPH than they were in 11th gear at 55 MPH. The wild and crazy trucker reputation is one deeply rooted in those times. Truck-caused accidents and fatalities were at epidemic levels. People in cars were rightly afraid of big trucks, far more so than they are now.
The difference is what constitutes an unreasonable risk to the general public, namely the weight of the vehicle, number of passengers, and HAZMAT. The hauling of freight in no way in and of itself presents an unreasonable risk to the general driving public, and is thus a non-issue with regard the safety of HOS regulations. The job of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is to concern themselves with the safety of the public at large by ensuring the safe operation of heavy vehicles and large buses. The primary mission of the FMCSA is improving the safety of commercial motor vehicles (CMV) and truck drivers through enactment and enforcement of safety regulations. Cargo vans do not fit into that category, and for good reason, they aren't heavy vehicles and do not present a safety risk beyond that of a light truck or automobile, in other words, they present no additional safety risk to the public than the public themselves.
The weight of the vehicle has a direct bearing on the safety of and the risk to the general public. All motor vehicles, including mopeds, pose a danger. It's the degree of danger that determines regulation. Which do you think poses the greater inherent danger to the general public, a Honda Civic, or an 80,000 pound big truck? Both vehicles pose a danger, to be sure, but in identical accidents, the big truck will cause more damage and injury than the Honda, more often than not.
The FMCSA regulates vehicles based on size and weight. Vehicles that are larger than a certain size or are heavier than a certain amount are regulated because they have a greater inherent danger. It does not only apply to trucks, but all heavy vehicles including buses and combination vehicles.
This is already addressed in more detail here, which ironically (and I do love a good irony) is a result of replying to a post from a year and a half ago of Greg's on the same topic that he once again introduced in this thread, that of non-CMVs being subject to FMCSA rules and regulations, specifically, the drivers of soccer mommy vans having to prove rest breaks to the satisfaction of the DOT.
The FMCSA or the government isn't going to start imposing HoS or mileage limits on light and medium vehicles, unless those vehicles start causing the kinds of accident damage that heavy vehicles cause. The DOT does, actually, have to have a reason for any changes in regulations. They have to justify it, or as has happened in the past, a judge will rule the changes as invalid.
Heya Jake,
Youse might wanna check yer numbers there sport - they don't seem to jive with what the NHTSA is putting out for 2009 per the linked report (looks like you're about 12,000 on the high side per below):
Highlights of 2009 Motor Vehicle Crashes
An honest broker would provide the respective numbers of each type of vehicle on the road (so that a relative comparison could be made)
Of course, the statistics that would really be relevant (commercially-driven light trucks vs. commercially driven big trucks) for this little chat aren't likely to be available.
Inaccurate statement per the file I linked - although it's relatively close - something that's not terribly surprising given the number of pick'em up trucks in society.
BTW - tell Elwood we said hey !
Well hey there sport,
thanx for the info, albeit misleading.
Government stats are a crapshoot sometimes.
Twasnt my numbers, but since you asked, here is a web site to help you understand better: FARS Encyclopedia: Vehicles - All Vehicles
Hit the "FARS" tab, then "vehicle" sub tab. the first data screen that comes up will reflect the numbers I posted.
My bad for not giving the web site.
So I guees you were wrong in stating I was wrong.
But hey you aint the first.
Elwood says hey back, .........you know you kinda of remind
me of the Henry Gibson character in the movie.
Last edited:
Heya Jake,
An honest broker would provide the respective numbers of each type of vehicle on the road (so that a relative comparison could be made)
Of course, the statistics that would really be relevant (commercially-driven light trucks vs. commercially driven big trucks) for this little chat aren't likely to be available.
Inaccurate statement per the file I linked - although it's relatively close - something that's not terribly surprising given the number of pick'em up trucks in society.
BTW - tell Elwood we said hey !
There is a break out of the different light trucks in MY web site.
But, regulation is usually by CLASS not a sub class as, VAN, (now dont start on being "sub class").
My response is to the Shelled one saying the CLASS, Passenger vehicle and light truck, was safer that large trucks, which it clearly is not.
People should not listen to him.
Also, I was confirming his comparison of light trucks to passenger vehicles fatalities as, pardon the pun "DEAD ON".
Okay, on this point, people should listen to him.........
Last edited:
tenntrucker
Expert Expediter
Thanks Turtle for explaining why vans shouldn't be under same rules as the T/T and S/T's, I'll try and see it from your view.
Sent from my DROID X2
Sent from my DROID X2
Thank you, Turtle for your thoughtful reply and well-articulated points. You answer well the question, why should drivers of big trucks log? But are you also suggesting that van drivers do not push safety limits and drive tired? You stated well the sins of big-rig drivers, but what of those vanners?