Interesting Arguements Against EOBRs
- Thread starter ATeam
- Start date
Interesting Arguments Against EOBRs
This from Land Line
"October 22, 2010 – The looming electronic on-board recorder mandate facing the trucking industry falls short on many fronts according to the petitioners brief filed by the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association in its legal challenge of the regulation...." Full report
OOIDA makes several interesting points in its brief. It's good food for thought.
This from Land Line
"October 22, 2010 – The looming electronic on-board recorder mandate facing the trucking industry falls short on many fronts according to the petitioners brief filed by the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association in its legal challenge of the regulation...." Full report
OOIDA makes several interesting points in its brief. It's good food for thought.
Re: Interesting Arguments Against EOBRs
That is a good article but I am a bit disappointed that they did not also mention the violation of our 5th Amendment rights, innocent until proven guilty. The mandating of an EOBR is due to the assumption that a driver is faking log entries. This assumption of guilt is NO different that the assumption of guilt when requiring MANDATORY drug testing. No reasonable suspicion of drug use, only the fact that we drive a truck. Sad state of affairs and so few seem to be bothered by it.
Then add the fact that MANY carriers are requiring these things, prior to government mandates AND many are going beyond and putting controls on drivers off duty time. That is beyond employee and more closer to slave.
That is a good article but I am a bit disappointed that they did not also mention the violation of our 5th Amendment rights, innocent until proven guilty. The mandating of an EOBR is due to the assumption that a driver is faking log entries. This assumption of guilt is NO different that the assumption of guilt when requiring MANDATORY drug testing. No reasonable suspicion of drug use, only the fact that we drive a truck. Sad state of affairs and so few seem to be bothered by it.
Then add the fact that MANY carriers are requiring these things, prior to government mandates AND many are going beyond and putting controls on drivers off duty time. That is beyond employee and more closer to slave.
I don't think we need EOBRs. FMCSA is going overboard on things. If they want drivers to do all these things, Then all four wheeler should have to do the same things we have to go threw. After about a week of cars going threw scales and roadside inspection the public would change there mind on trucks.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Warning Sarcasm ahead!
It is madding that people just see what they want to see and forget that this is a federally regulated activity. Until we eliminate the interstate commerce clause in the constitution, then it will be an issue.
For God's sakes a fourth amendment violation?
That's over the top because EOBRs are not, REPEAT not monitored by either the federal or state authorities unless the driver and or carrier has been audited because one or the other is found to be deficient in fulfilling the simple requirements of log or record keeping respectfully. THEY, EOBRs are monitored by the carrier and only the carrier which by mandating the electronic part of it, seems to simply replace the log book and other means of evidence.
IF EOBRs are found to be a violation of any 'right' because of any "real-time, government mandated, 24-hour electronic surveillance of a driver’s location" then qualcomm units, the use of express centers and using board positions for work are also an unwarranted used of location monitoring on the part of the company because they are in essence monitoring the truck's, hence the driver's movements 24/7 regardless what the driver is doing.
5th amendment violations? I won't go there either.
If the OOIDA would like to do something useful, force tightening up of licensing requirements and testing, get rid of these logging hours, put vans into the CMV category and get the government to issue one card for FAST, Twix and hazmat.
End of sarcasm - have a nice day.
It is madding that people just see what they want to see and forget that this is a federally regulated activity. Until we eliminate the interstate commerce clause in the constitution, then it will be an issue.
For God's sakes a fourth amendment violation?
That's over the top because EOBRs are not, REPEAT not monitored by either the federal or state authorities unless the driver and or carrier has been audited because one or the other is found to be deficient in fulfilling the simple requirements of log or record keeping respectfully. THEY, EOBRs are monitored by the carrier and only the carrier which by mandating the electronic part of it, seems to simply replace the log book and other means of evidence.
IF EOBRs are found to be a violation of any 'right' because of any "real-time, government mandated, 24-hour electronic surveillance of a driver’s location" then qualcomm units, the use of express centers and using board positions for work are also an unwarranted used of location monitoring on the part of the company because they are in essence monitoring the truck's, hence the driver's movements 24/7 regardless what the driver is doing.
5th amendment violations? I won't go there either.
If the OOIDA would like to do something useful, force tightening up of licensing requirements and testing, get rid of these logging hours, put vans into the CMV category and get the government to issue one card for FAST, Twix and hazmat.
End of sarcasm - have a nice day.
Don't matter if you agree or not. Don't matter if we are stuck with this or not. Just another poke in the eye as far as I am concerned. No point in arguing. I feel how I feel. Nothing else matters.
Don't matter if you agree or not. Don't matter if we are stuck with this or not. Just another poke in the eye as far as I am concerned. No point in arguing. I feel how I feel. Nothing else matters.
Greg, I could not agree with you more on this! Good job
A "possible" real life example to show how silly these things are and how they can be ignored and there by NOT improving safety.
Doing the following is NOT a good idea.
You drive ten hours from Thursday to deliver a load on Friday. YOu have a Monday predispatch. Park your truck at a truck stop and rent a car. No sleep. Drive 8 hours to get to your favorite casino. You sleep an hour or so then get up and gamble and party all day Saturday and deep into the night. Get up early and gamble some more. You drive 8 hours back early Monday, get back to your truck JUST in time to make your pick up. Your electric baby sitter, EOBR, says everything is OKEE DOKEE and LEGAL to drive.
That driver would NOT be a responsible driver and the EOBR did NOT make him/her one. Those of us who are ALREADY responsible would NOT do the above, ALREADY run legal, and do NOT need to spend the extra money for one. We already do what is right. Little will be gained in safety. You can also bet that it will NOT take long for people to find "work arounds" for those things.
Doing the following is NOT a good idea.
You drive ten hours from Thursday to deliver a load on Friday. YOu have a Monday predispatch. Park your truck at a truck stop and rent a car. No sleep. Drive 8 hours to get to your favorite casino. You sleep an hour or so then get up and gamble and party all day Saturday and deep into the night. Get up early and gamble some more. You drive 8 hours back early Monday, get back to your truck JUST in time to make your pick up. Your electric baby sitter, EOBR, says everything is OKEE DOKEE and LEGAL to drive.
That driver would NOT be a responsible driver and the EOBR did NOT make him/her one. Those of us who are ALREADY responsible would NOT do the above, ALREADY run legal, and do NOT need to spend the extra money for one. We already do what is right. Little will be gained in safety. You can also bet that it will NOT take long for people to find "work arounds" for those things.
THAT is a VERY true statement.
The EOBR is NOT going to do away with stupid. All it is going to accomplish is cost me MORE money, with NO added return for the expense.
THAT is a VERY true statement.
The EOBR is NOT going to do away with stupid. All it is going to accomplish is cost me MORE money, with NO added return for the expense.