Is It Really True That Truckers Can't Agree? Let's Try.

[xiggi]

This thread goes to prove only that regulations they feel are important are good. Ones they don't agree with are worthless. I'm rather amazed anyone driving a truck wants more of any kind. Like they say be careful what you wish for.

Soon we will have several million new citizens our government will happily pay to train who will take jobs cheaper than you do now and work harder than many. Don't be fooled into thinking more training will equel more money.

Sent from my Fisher Price - ABC 123

 

[letzrockexpress]

Here's a new regulation I'd support: new drivers who can't back into a spot in less than 6 tries should not be allowed to drive trucks with backing beepers.
I'm serious - goober kept me awake for half an hour last night with the beeping!

It might not be his fault. I graduated from a truck driving school back in the 90's. It was a three week program. They spent one day on backing! One day!

 

[cheri1122]

This thread goes to prove only that regulations they feel are important are good. Ones they don't agree with are worthless. I'm rather amazed anyone driving a truck wants more of any kind. Like they say be careful what you wish for.

Soon we will have several million new citizens our government will happily pay to train who will take jobs cheaper than you do now and work harder than many. Don't be fooled into thinking more training will equel more money.

Sent from my Fisher Price - ABC 123

Sooner or later, the government is going to have to figure out that people who can't find decent jobs do not make for 'peace and prosperity', sigh.
Meantime, as ATeam says, the agencies are going to write regulations whether we want them or not, so we'd be dumb to let them do it without hearing what we think. That's how a democracy is supposed to work, IMO.

 

[xiggi]

Sooner or later, the government is going to have to figure out that people who can't find decent jobs do not make for 'peace and prosperity', sigh.
Meantime, as ATeam says, the agencies are going to write regulations whether we want them or not, so we'd be dumb to let them do it without hearing what we think. That's how a democracy is supposed to work, IMO.

Seems they had a lot of public listening sessions this last go round, how did that work out for ya? No one here has enough money to influence regulations that's all that matters these days on Washington. Imho saying their going to regulate anyway so I want mine too is not seeing very clearly. Again the assumption it will increase pay is fools gold the only thing its gaurenteed to increase is the drivers expenses.

Sent from my Fisher Price - ABC 123

 

[ATeam]

Can we get a clear definition of what "professionalism" is as it pertains to trucking or driving in general? I have heard this term bandied about several times this week. Guido was bemoaning a day or two ago on facebook about losing a load to a less than "professional" expediter. I would like to know what you think a professional driver really is...

That's a great question. The dictionary definition of professional or professionalism is quite general.

 

[ATeam]

Seems they had a lot of public listening sessions this last go round, how did that work out for ya? No one here has enough money to influence regulations that's all that matters these days on Washington.

That is true if you intend to operate within the Beltway. But as long as votes still matter, working from the grass roots is still an effective strategy. In Minnesota, with an effective grass-roots effort, we won an election with a $600,000 budget against combined opposition of $16 million.

In seeking regulatory reform, we would not need anywhere near the number of votes that are required to win an election. We would need only the amount needed to gain the attention of the legislators who write the laws (not the Washington bureaucrats). If you had even ten truckers in each U.S. House district operating as a group and calling together on their Representative at his or her home office in most districts to advocate a common agenda, you would get their attention, and as the group grew, you would have an impact.

It's not about operating in the traditional manner inside the beltway. It's about operating in a grass-roots manner, using votes, not money, to make a difference.

The listening sessions did not work at all because the bureaucrats have the luxury of ignoring the public and the system in which they operate is corrupt. But as long as votes still matter, a grass-roots group can still have an impact.

 

[ATeam]

One other thing to note about a grass-roots effort is that it would take time. Sadly, time is not on the side of any truck driver these days. Technology marches on and the future of truck driving is not with human beings but with robots. The value of what we provide today will continue to decline because we will be replaced by machines.

We are already seeing this in bits and pieces. EOBR's eliminated the need for drivers to know how to complete a log book. That enables motor carriers to put people who are less skilled in basic arithmetic behind the wheel. ECM's and communications make it possible for truck owners to monitor not only the location but the maintenance state of their trucks from afar; thereby eliminating the need for drivers who know how to do things like check the oil and tire pressure.

All of the major car companies are now racing to bring self-driving cars to market. Truck manufactures are doing this research too. We will see self-driving cars and trucks in our lifetime, making a grass-roots regulatory battle one not worth fighting.

Even if we succeeded in upping the driver training standards for drivers, it would not matter for long because machines that are 100% attentive to their work 100% of the time will replace human beings behind the wheel. Indeed, the machines will eliminate the need for a steering wheel altogether, along with windshields, climate-controlled cabs, and everything else humans require to operate a commercial vehicle.

 

[xiggi]

So you feel it would be easier to organize this grass roots movement in for the cause of more regulations rather than less?

Sent from my Fisher Price - ABC 123

 

[ATeam]

I feel it would be possible to organize a grass-roots movement of drivers and friends who are committed to improving safety and elevating the job to a true profession. Again, as long as we keep the focus on safety, the debate can be won. If we change the debate to more regulation or less regulation, we lose. This is not about regulations. It's about safety.

Much of the non-trucking public is already on our side, just ask the four-wheelers who have been terrified by the agressive truck drivers who ride four inches off their bumper to bully them into a lane change. The terror four-wheelers experience when this happens even once, leaves an impression that lasts for years. That emotional power can be tapped and turned into support if the topic is about safety.

Note that the arguement that more regulation is itself bad, and therefore a reason to not regulate, was lost long ago. Washington and state capitols have become regulation factories with some people there valuing their contribution to society by the number of regulations they create.

 

[xiggi]

Saying its about safety and not regulation is like a politition saying it is a fee there for not a tax. I have to question if the whole profresional thing isn't more of a feel good ruse than it is any other goal. As stated earlier I have severe doubt it would do anything but raise expenses for drivers. Those with much more voice and pull ie money are going to be heard much more loudly than your ten callers.

You can educate and dress someone up all you want but you still can't fix stupid.

Sent from my Fisher Price - ABC 123

 

[ATeam]

Adding to the number of regulations is not bad in itself, just like subtracting from the number of regulations is not good in itself. Once upon a time there were no fire alarms, then there were. At some point, a new regulation came along making it illegal to trigger a false alarm. That increases the number of regulations by one but that is not bad in itself.

 

[ATeam]

Saying its about safety and not regulation is like a politition saying it is a fee there for not a tax.

I did not say it is not about regulation. The common agenda referenced above would change the number of regulations. The end result might be a fewer number of regs or a greater number. The number is not important. What the regs say is. More to the point the regulatory burden is what is important. I suggest that driver training would increase the regulatory burden on people who wish to become commercial truck drivers and that the safety benefits to the public and increased pay (presumed) to the drivers would justify the burden.

I have to question if the whole profresional thing isn't more of a feel good ruse than it is any other goal.

I don't know what you mean by "feel good ruse" but can say that in my thinking, I'm not considering how it will make people feel. If I wanted truck drivers to feel good, I'd advocate regulations or the repeal of regulations that could be expected to make them feel good; something like eliminating the need for CDL's or eliminating all HOS ruels, or mandating that all shippers and receivers must provide free parking and driver lounges. This is not about how people feel. It's about safety.

As stated earlier I have severe doubt it would do anything but raise expenses for drivers. Those with much more voice and pull ie money are going to be heard much more loudly than your ten callers.

We have a difference of opinion here. Mine is based on what I saw personally when I was politically involved. I saw it as an activist calling on legislators and after the election, I saw it from the legislator side of the desk as I literally sat in their building and watched them respond to activists that came in. I believe that legislators respond to personal visits (not phone callers) because I have seen it several times.

 

[cheri1122]

I just don't understand the blanket knee jerk opposition to 'regulations'. For one thing, it's much too vague to be helpful, and for another, most people know that regulations are necessary, same as laws, and for the same reason.
If there are specific regulations that need revisited, that's one thing, but to reject any and all regulations is throwing the baby out with the bath water.
It's the same with taxes: no one enjoys the need for them, but we do enjoy what they provide: infrastructure, defense, LEOs, clean water & air, safe food - the list goes on.
Complaining about regulation and taxes may be the popular thing to do today, but it makes no sense. Both are a necessary part of the world we want to live in.
That said, if we don't speak up about which regulations might be appropriate, we get the regulations someone else wants instead.
And yes, we may get them anyhow, but does that mean we shouldn't even try?

 

[xiggi]

I just don't understand the blanket knee jerk opposition to 'regulations'. For one thing, it's much too vague to be helpful, and for another, most people know that regulations are necessary, same as laws, and for the same reason.
If there are specific regulations that need revisited, that's one thing, but to reject any and all regulations is throwing the baby out with the bath water.
It's the same with taxes: no one enjoys the need for them, but we do enjoy what they provide: infrastructure, defense, LEOs, clean water & air, safe food - the list goes on.
Complaining about regulation and taxes may be the popular thing to do today, but it makes no sense. Both are a necessary part of the world we want to live in.
That said, if we don't speak up about which regulations might be appropriate, we get the regulations someone else wants instead.
And yes, we may get them anyhow, but does that mean we shouldn't even try?

Even making the statement it is a knee jerk reaction displays a failure to understand how fed up people are with those who make rules. It takes no genius to figure out two thirds of the regulations we live under in are lives are completely unecassary. Failing to even accept the idea out of the box opposition might just be the best policy is looking with a closed mind.

No post has said how it would increase pay, how it wouldn't cost drivers more. No one has shown that it is needed or what it would actually accomplish bit yet you state opposing views are to vauge. How is saying it will increase pay less vaugue than saying it won't?

Sent from my Fisher Price - ABC 123

 

[zorry]

Was he smoking?

If yes, what was he smoking ?

 

[cheri1122]

Even making the statement it is a knee jerk reaction displays a failure to understand how fed up people are with those who make rules. It takes no genius to figure out two thirds of the regulations we live under in are lives are completely unecassary. Failing to even accept the idea out of the box opposition might just be the best policy is looking with a closed mind.

I understand how totally fed up people are with those who make the rules, I just don't agree that a blanket rejection of any and all new rules is the right approach. Times and technology change, and change requires new rules. If it's the people we're fed up with, then we should be attacking them, no?


No post has said how it would increase pay, how it wouldn't cost drivers more.

It may or may not increase pay [I thought ATeam addressed that], but even if it doesn't increase pay, it will increase both our safety and our credibility with those who make laws, and that makes increasing pay more likely when we push for that.

No one has shown that it is needed or what it would actually accomplish bit yet you state opposing views are to vauge. How is saying it will increase pay less vaugue than saying it won't?

Common sense has shown that it's needed - if there are facts and figures to support the rate of accidents among inexperienced drivers vs experienced, no one is admitting it. But look at it this way: in today's risk assessment environment, how long does an experienced driver continue driving after a second accident? Ergo: experienced drivers are safer, because they've encountered more opportunities to have an accident without doing so, and each one adds to their ability to continue avoiding accidents.
I don't know that it would increase pay [maybe, just by virtue of having more experienced drivers than not], but even if it doesn't, it's a good start to being heard in the legislative arena.

Sent from my Fisher Price - ABC 123

 

[zorry]

As trucks have gotten easier, and entry easier, my pay has gone.
The first day I drove as a hired driver, back in the 70's, I pulled tanker for 33cpm.
Today some feel that's a good wage.

Limiting entry, to those willing to make mire effort, may increase wages.

When I've got an empty space next to me at a Truckstop, I pray that the guy parking there has had sufficient training.

 

[pearlpro]

There are those that see a value in being heard and making an effort to be heard, and those that will throw there hands up and let them regulate you right out of a job, I dont prefer to be the Latter, I wont sit down, I wont be quiet...I will call and make noise no matter if its wasted in my heart, and mind Ive done the best I could. In America we all know that CASH LOBBYS PACS SUPER PACS, Heritage, Club for Growth, Hoover, , Citizens United get what they want because the BUY IT....Well if thats the way it is, so be it, But I may be old, dumb, whatever but my Congressman knows my name, he sees me at Town Halls, he writes me letters and signs them, and he takes my calls because Im informed and Ive usually got something to say besides repeating some soundbyte or daily news blather...

You can put your heart in it, and still fail and Ill go that way, but Ill be proud and my father who is in Heaven will be proud that I stood up for this profession I love....My Mom says I wanted to be a truck driver all my life, I wanted to be a rock and roller but being from the Midwest, being a trucker was just easy. The rules and Regs and Laws havent always been this way, its only after these Lobbys, CASH LINED POCKETS got involved and somebody wanted a EPA mandated exhaust, somebody wanted a Crash resistant doo dad, somebody had to have Smoke Discombobulators and on and on...and realy its ran out of control until now heaped upon regulation is heaps of new regulations lining the pockets of Congress and those that say ITS FOR SAFETY....

Theres not one area thats got a regulation, or subpart, or collated column that couldnt be made better by DRIVERS input. Ya they dont listen well, another entire reason to not say OH WELL THEY DONT LISTEN, thats when we get a concerted, directed approach. A CAMPAIGN...directed straight at those that matter and kill them with FACTS....this is why I joined OOIDA....

my 2 cents may not be worth spit, but you wont ever stop me from saying it, loud and in your face...if its the FACTS

 

[blizzard2014]

It's no surprise to me that the protest was a big disappointment. There should have been trucks up and down I-95 as far as they eye can see. All the way from the Virginia state line to Bangor Maine. But, alas, it never happened. It's really sad to see that we as drivers do not have any semblance of unity anymore. You know why they don't take benefits away from senior citizens; it's because they have a lot of political power due to their unity in numbers. If drivers would band together like AARP, we would have a voice on Capitol Hill!

 

[pearlpro]

BUT....Would you want Larry Klayman standing out in front of guys in trucks telling the President to come out with his hands up, Put the Quoran down, and more of that kind of crap....Impeach Obama, and Change the HOS....our new slogan.....I was eating dinner just the other night and was talking about the trucking strike, or lack of, to some freinds when one of them said, WHO WAS THE GUY THAT DEMANDED THE PRESIDENT COME OUT WITH HIS HANDS UP...HE IS A LOONEY.....now this is no trucker, its Joe Public, and thats exactly the image we do not want people to have about US....

I dont like what Politicians do, hell theyve been screwing me and you since the Govt began...but saying stuff like Hes not my President, he is a Muslim, has no Birth certificate and he is really Osama Bin Obama....no Ill leave that to those that believe whatever the late night sat radio guys claim is reality....

We can involve Politicians and we do need them on our side, we may have to get them on both sides of the isle, they do introduce bills and laws etc...last thing we need is to be quoted or seen as believing guys like Larry Klayman, Alex Jones and Pete Santilli.....you can balance what they report agaisnt the papers, the news and find a common ground, but Im not standing at the WW2 Mall and making demands that are really Ignorant racist rants.

It doesnt take a strike, it takes concerned educated involved men and women with Facts and Knowledge who can represent this industry. No insults, no anger, no diatribe, but sincere desire to make it better for all of us...if we can make one change, one revision, one rulemaking and make it work for us, weve found success......Industry people with a desire to make the Industry better for all of us...