NTSB Says Straight-Truck Safety Needs More Attention
- Thread starter Monty
- Start date
moose
Veteran Expediter
this study was done by {ATRI} the ATA.
it is flowed, & aimed @ promoting ATA agendas.
never before did Deborah Hersman relayed on a pure ATA study to make a policy.
unless, as we can see, it calls for more Gov. intervention.
anyone else think she overstayed her invitation ?
it is flowed, & aimed @ promoting ATA agendas.
never before did Deborah Hersman relayed on a pure ATA study to make a policy.
unless, as we can see, it calls for more Gov. intervention.
anyone else think she overstayed her invitation ?
I wonder how many of the trucks involved in the accidents were U-Haul type trucks that were driven by people that have no experience in that size vehicle.
Not until the GVWR hits 26,001 pounds.
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
You're right. A chauffeur license is for 10k and above.
Depends on the state. There's only like three states that still issue chauffeur's licenses for that. The rest of them, it's regular operator or CDL, nothing in between.
Personally, I think it's retarded to not require a CDL if you drive a CMV which requires logging and scaling. Especially in this case, since it's a retarded holdover from back when states routinely still issued chauffeur licenses.
Brisco
Expert Expediter
Yep...........First thing came to my Mind after reading the article was how many of these accidents in this "Study" involved both 28ft U-Haul, Ryder, and Budget Trucks. I wonder if they kept those Vehicles separated from their overall results considering 95% of the Drivers of those vehicles are not using them in a "Commercial - For Hire" Capacity. My Bet.....They Didn't.............
And......Considering how small of a Percentage of "Straight Trucks" there is in Trucking overall......in a "Commercial Motor Vehicle" capacity that is.........VS number of Big Rigs there is out there...........I'm pretty much guessing this study has some serious flaws in it with the overall results.
In other words...........You Guys that are driving these Box Trucks..........over 26K or not........CDL or not.......in a CMV Capacity (Professionally)....are probably being judged by people that have lumped you into the same Category as Tommy the Tooth Fairy who normally runs around town in his cute little Honda who had NO business renting a 28ft U-Haul moving truck to help Harry the Has Been move out of his boyfriends house.
zorry
Veteran Expediter
I understand the under 10,000 # trucks being exempt. Can't bog down enforcement with every plumber or flower delivery guy in a van.
I'd like to see any vehicle doing FOR HIRE cargo scaling and logging.
Particularly after after talking to a chemist I delivered a liter of poison to.
I'd like to see any vehicle doing FOR HIRE cargo scaling and logging.
Particularly after after talking to a chemist I delivered a liter of poison to.
They exempt under 10,000 vehicles because they don't pose an unreasonable threat to the general public, not more of a threat than any other car, van or light truck out there. If you're delivering poison that's HAZMAT in any quantity, you have to have a CDL with the endorsement to haul it, anyway, regardless of vehicle type, because HAZMAT which requires placarding poses an unreasonable risk ti the general public.
There'a a trucking company in Paris, TN that got in big trouble a few years ago. They had like ten or twelve 38,000 GVWR trucks that they had de-rated to 25,990 pounds so the drivers wouldn't need a CDL to drive them. That's fine, except they continued to load it well past the 26,001 mark, sometimes even past the 38,000 mark. One of the got into an accident and not only was he overweight, but he was overweight in CMV territory and in CDL territory. The resulting fines and court costs were in excess of half a million dollars. It wasn't pretty. No tellin' what the costs would have been had the driver of the vehicle (who was at-fault in the accident) was seriously injured or killed.
There'a a trucking company in Paris, TN that got in big trouble a few years ago. They had like ten or twelve 38,000 GVWR trucks that they had de-rated to 25,990 pounds so the drivers wouldn't need a CDL to drive them. That's fine, except they continued to load it well past the 26,001 mark, sometimes even past the 38,000 mark. One of the got into an accident and not only was he overweight, but he was overweight in CMV territory and in CDL territory. The resulting fines and court costs were in excess of half a million dollars. It wasn't pretty. No tellin' what the costs would have been had the driver of the vehicle (who was at-fault in the accident) was seriously injured or killed.
paullud
Veteran Expediter
Bite your tongue sir...well your keyboard. I'll have you know that this study was conducted by the government.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app
zorry
Veteran Expediter
My point is, there are some in a van that would have taken a one liter bottle of poison. At this point it becomes a risk.
Scaling and other regulations may help avoid that in the future.
With little to no training, or understanding of the risks, the new generation of haulers are scary.
Add in brokers that'll do anything for a buck.
A shipper told me a story last week of a team that loaded Radioactive and promptly pulled the placards to run with less hassle.
The geniuses got caught because he forgot to instal placards prior to delivery.
Scaling and other regulations may help avoid that in the future.
With little to no training, or understanding of the risks, the new generation of haulers are scary.
Add in brokers that'll do anything for a buck.
A shipper told me a story last week of a team that loaded Radioactive and promptly pulled the placards to run with less hassle.
The geniuses got caught because he forgot to instal placards prior to delivery.
zorry
Veteran Expediter
The same gummint that has inspectors writing up unsecured peebles.
Brisco hit the nail on the head, no seperation of us professionals.
I run under 26,000# for hire, and I am required to log time on a time sheet if local, if outside of my 100 mile radius, I have to carry and maintain a logbook for at lease one week after a long run of 100 mile radius. I have to follow the inspections just like the over 26000# drivers.
Where did this mind
get her info from if she asked a D.O.T. officer she would know that Bubba renting a U haul or Penske truck falls under the F.M.C.S.A. regs.
So dose this mean the motor home drivers will be subject to the CDL and F.M.C.S.A. regs too?
C.D.L., LOGBOOK, SCALE AND C.V.S.A. INSPECTIONS? .
I run under 26,000# for hire, and I am required to log time on a time sheet if local, if outside of my 100 mile radius, I have to carry and maintain a logbook for at lease one week after a long run of 100 mile radius. I have to follow the inspections just like the over 26000# drivers.
Where did this mind
get her info from if she asked a D.O.T. officer she would know that Bubba renting a U haul or Penske truck falls under the F.M.C.S.A. regs.So dose this mean the motor home drivers will be subject to the CDL and F.M.C.S.A. regs too?
C.D.L., LOGBOOK, SCALE AND C.V.S.A. INSPECTIONS? .
Last edited:
Brisco hit the nail on the head, no seperation of us professionals.
I run under 26,000# for hire, and I am required to log time on a time sheet if local, if outside of my 100 mile radius, I have to carry and maintain a logbook for at lease one week after a long run of 100 mile radius. I have to follow the inspections just like the over 26000# drivers.
Where did this mind
So dose this mean the motor home drivers will be subject to the CDL and F.M.C.S.A. regs too?
C.D.L., LOGBOOK, SCALE AND C.V.S.A. INSPECTIONS? .
Dot doesn't give a hoot about rental trucks. One of the first times I drove one unsure I went through the scale. The guy inside came on the speaker and asked if I needed something then said I did not need to stop at scales. 24 ft truck pulling a car trailer with a pickup on it.
Sent from my Fisher Price ABC-123.
Murraycroexp
Veteran Expediter
Which, in the wrong hands, could be deadly!!