Side Marker Lights

[greg334]

The retroactivity bothers me too. If you drive through an uncontrolled intersection on Monday, they erect a stop sign on Wednesday, and give you a ticket on Friday for the violation you are said to have committed on Monday, is that fair?

If they changed the rules of NFL football and then went back through past games to re-score the plays under the new rules, and then pronounced new winners and losers, is that fair?

Life sucks Phil, life isn't fair but look around and see what kind of crap is on the road with such 'excellent' drivers behind the wheels. They have to start somewhere and what is going to be will be in the past soon enough.

The other day I was passed by a Volvo expediter that was falling apart. I got a picture of it, pretty pathetic looking truck with lights out, things falling off of it and primer/different colors of paint. My truck looks old and a bit tired but never looked that bad.

If you get a warning ticket for speeding in 2009, disagree that you were speeding, but don't fight it because there is nothing to fight (it was a warning ticket with no points attached), and then in 2010 they change the rules to say the warning ticket carries CSA points and they charge the points to you in a way that counts today, is that fair?

Nope it isn't fair either but how many of us should worry about speeding?

If you were driving a company truck in 2009 and got cited for an equipment violation (say turn signal lamp), and the company did not hold it against you, and the company paid the fine, and you did not worry about it because the violation does not add points to your driver's license, and you did not bother to fix it on the spot because to you at the time the violation was inconsequential and it is the company's union mechanic's job to fix it;...and then in 2010, they change the rules to make that prior violation count against you in CSA points that are so consequential that you can lose your job if you get too many, is that fair?

Yep that's not fair. But then if you are the one driving, you are the one in control - not the union mechanic or the anyone else so that kind of means you are responsible.

Driver behavior is changing now because the rules and the consequences for different kinds of violations have changed. But it is just plain wrong, and it is a form of government oppression and regulatory abuse, to change the rules retroactively.

Driver behavior for those who are crap drivers should change. I don't see any difference in what I do now than I will expect to see next year. I'm not a perfect driver by any means but I am not afraid of this issue because it is a non-issue to me.

What is plain wrong is the way we license people to drive weapons of mass destruction. The tests are a joke, the requirements are a joke and this only ensures that the harden idiots who can't drive are off the road and hopefully will wake up a few who need to be off the road but still have a chance.

One thing I harp on and people get tired is training but yesterday proved my point - the training is only as good as the company wants it to be and the CSA 2010 program does not address bad behavior where it should - at the start of the career.

Yesterday I was run off the road by a trainee and his trainer. It wasn't something I took lightly and I headed for the company to complain. The trainee admitted to it, which meant he lost his job, the trainer didn't admit to anything but he too lost his job. I have no guilty feelings when someone admits that he was told "don't worry, he will move if he knows what's good for him" and they lose their jobs.

There is nothing fair or right about assigning violation points to a driver under new rules when the points were earned under old rules. I don't know of any now but would not be surprised to see a law suit rise to challenge the practice.

The only law suit that seems to be possible is over the lack of a mechanism to fight the charges made without evidence.

There are drivers out there today that may lose their jobs with the next tail light that burns out on them while driving; not because they are bad drivers, but because new rules were retroactively applied to old violations like warning tickets.

I think if anyone will lose their 'jobs', it will be over the accumulation of violations, not just one light being out.

These poor souls should not lose their jobs. They should be given the chance to modify their behavior and run under the new rules from this point forward. It is unfair and wrong to put them under new rules that penalize them today for their behavior from this point backward.

And why not? They know the rules, it is not like they were new without experience and told not to worry about it. I think it is a great thing that behaviors will have to be modified, I think it is a great thing that marginal drivers will be booted, and I think it is a great thing that everyone will be on a level playing field.

Phil, you worried that you will become a target?

You need to worry about your driving habits?

 

[cheri1122]

I agree with Phil: making it retroactive is unfair. It penalizes drivers [and carriers] for decisions made under a different set of rules, without any possibility of changing them.
I hope it does inspire a class action suit.

 

[greg334]

Cheri,
I can't see the unfairness. I think it is fair to say that the unfairness is when you can't fight the violation through any process even if the charge was dismissed, it just does not exist.

What are the different rules, speeding, lights out, poorly maintained trucks are not being changed at all.

Retroactive points from what I understand are part of the overall carrier points and is used to get the system off the ground. The points are set through a matrix, which means if you get a speeding ticket, it has the same weight regardless if it is gotten in NYC or Detroit, not at the whim of the jurisdiction to set the points.

Seeing the point that this is a system to evaluate and identify bad behavior on the part of the driver to be corrected, it has to start somewhere.

What grounds would there be for a class action suit? It is a federally mandated program, as is a DOT physical and so on.

 

[guido4475]

Unfair would be introducing the new set of rules and then saying, "oh, by the way, this is retroactive for the last year" without notice. But they have been preaching what happens now will affect youre future.The notice has been given for how long now?It is old news.We should try to be the best we can be with or without these new rules.period.

 

[cheri1122]

The point is that one cannot retroactively decide to fight a ticket that didn't seem worth bothering over when it was received. I have no problem with eliminating the 'bad apples', just think it should not penalize a decision made under a different set of rules, because a different choice may have been made.

 

[highway star]

If you're a responsible O/O, like Phil is, with just one small violation to worry about, big deal!! I don't know how far back they're going, but I think the only thing I have that will be retroactive is my back-up lights not coming on during a DOT inspection. Other than that, my routine of keeping things in good working order serves me well. The folks that just haven't really given a crap? Time to shape up!

Deep breaths people, the Fat Lady ain't singin' yet...

(Highway Star smacks himself in the forehead.)

I should be more sensitive, the Caloricly Challenged Lady ain't singin" yet.

 

[guido4475]

The point is that one cannot retroactively decide to fight a ticket that didn't seem worth bothering over when it was received. I have no problem with eliminating the 'bad apples', just think it should not penalize a decision made under a different set of rules, because a different choice may have been made.

Cheri, ANY ticket is worth fighting for for any cdl holder.That cdl is our livlihood, and should be protected and guarded with our lives.Without it, you wont have a job.There are alot of citations that some may of received, but not deserved.If this is the case, they should of fought for it to be removed then, not when a new law comes into effect.

 

[greg334]

But what different set of rules?

The rules have always been there, the penalties have always been there but the way the violations have been counted are now different.

 

[cheri1122]

Cheri, ANY ticket is worth fighting for for any cdl holder

That's an opinion. The decision to fight a ticket or let it go is not as easy as that, when fighting it may cost more than it would save, under the old rules.
.That cdl is our livlihood, and should be protected and guarded with our lives.Without it, you wont have a job.There are alot of citations that some may of received, but not deserved.If this is the case, they should of fought for it to be removed then, not when a new law comes into effect.

Hindsight is always 20/20, and telling folks what they should 'of' done is no help whatsoever - except to your own smug self image.
Introducing a new scoring system is reasonable, making it retroactive is not, and I'm done with the argument.

 

[iceroadtrucker]

Having your CDL in a Common wealth State that makes their own rules as they deem fit.

1. any speeding ticket in the state of VA if your a CDL Holder and your CDL is from Virginia is an auto 1200.00 fine. and You were speeding in VA. (thats old news)

2. Virginia will throw out that rule book when it comes to chicken Lights. if its on the truck it better work.
no matter what. Remember a fix it ticket still points in the state of VA even if its CHICKEN Lights. If your CDL is from VA .
Virginia like CA got there hands out MONIE MONIE MONIE.
Again Read this If your CDL is from VA you bend over and grab your ankels. Peroid.

 

[guido4475]

Hindsight is always 20/20, and telling folks what they should 'of' done is no help whatsoever - except to your own smug self image.
Introducing a new scoring system is reasonable, making it retroactive is not, and I'm done with the argument.

And so the slamming continues...lol.Why are you the first one to slam a person or me in a conversation?Why do you get so defensive when you are proven wrong, and know it? Smug self image? Please explain yourself, so I have a better understanding of how I am so smug...lol.This I'd love to hear.

 

[cheri1122]

And so the slamming continues...lol.Why are you the first one to slam a person or me in a conversation?
Looks to me as if Greg 'slammed' Phil, and I said I agree with Phil, after which you 'slammed' my opinion.
Why do you get so defensive when you are proven wrong, and know it?
I'm always prepared to defend my words.
"Proven wrong"? Where was that, exactly?
Smug self image? Please explain yourself, so I have a better understanding of how I am so smug...lol.This I'd love to hear.

Statements regarding what other folks 'should of done' are the same as "I told you so", in that it serves no helpful purpose, except to make the person saying it feel smug.

 

[greg334]

Cheri,
Sorry to get your feathers in a ruffle, I have my reasons and I won't say what they are. I'm not bashing Phil but I can if you want.

After two intense courses on the subject of CSA 2010, I am satisfied that this is not the doom and gloom that everyone is talking about outside of two issues - one is the abuse from the carrier that can take place and the other is the lack of a mechanism to address issues arising from tickets and citations that were dismissed through a legal process - both needs to be addressed and both seemed to be on other's radars (ooida is one).

The idea that there are two different set of rules, the past and the new ones, seems to be a little off. The violation you got a couple years ago is still part of the carrier's records and has to be counted, that is one of the reasons why it is retroactive. The same goes for the carrier's performance, that all matters going forward.

Also I apologize to Mygia for the tangent.

 

[guido4475]

Statements regarding what other folks 'should of done' are the same as "I told you so", in that it serves no helpful purpose, except to make the person saying it feel smug.

I am sorry you have misinterpreted my post in such a way.It wasnt intended the way you thought it is.

I thought in a few of youre posts ago on this thread you said end of conversation?LOL......Thanks for the chuckle..

 

[ATeam]

Unfair would be introducing the new set of rules and then saying, "oh, by the way, this is retroactive for the last year" without notice. But they have been preaching what happens now will affect youre future.The notice has been given for how long now?It is old news.We should try to be the best we can be with or without these new rules.period.

That might work if the coming new rules they talked about in the past were the same ones that are in effect now, and if we could count on even those rules remaining the same after they are first announced.

CSA 2010 was originally scheduled to go into full effect in January, 2010, I believe. That got bumped to July, 2010, and now we read that it won't go into full effect until sometime in 2011. Not only has the effective date changed but the rules continue to change as you read this. Carriers have screamed loudly about the rules and the rule makers are responding by changing the rules (and patting themselves on the back for being good listeners and responsive to those they regulate).

Violations that put no points on your CDL now carry CSA points retroactively applied. But it is not that clear. The number of points assigned to certain violations are under review. There may be drivers out there right now who were dumped by their carriers because of their present CSA score and may end up having an acceptable CSA score in the near future because the rules were changed once again. But what good does that do a dumped driver today? The driver is out of work while bureaucrats bicker.

Retroactivity is not the only problem with CSA 2010. Another problem is the moving target. People who thought they knew what they were talking about yesterday may be wrong today, not because they were wrong then but because the rules have once again changed or are in the process of changing.

Another fundamentally unfair aspect of CSA 2010 is warning tickets that did not carry points when issued but that carry points now. Even today it is a problem.

If you get a warning ticket for speeding and wish to fight it, how do you do so? No court will take up the case because no violation was cited. Only a warning ticket was issued. But under CSA 2010, the ticket carries points that can make the difference between a driver keeping or losing his job if enough points from inconsequential past violations become consequential under the new rules.

It's crazy, but if you get pulled over today and the officer wants to issue you a warning ticket, it is better to ask him or her to give you a citation instead. At least then you will have an enhanced ability to protect your CDL by getting something you can fight or plead down in court.

 

[ATeam]

If you're a responsible O/O, like Phil is, with just one small violation to worry about, big deal!

I have no concern about my immediate fate under CSA 2010. As you pointed out, I have only one small violation to worry about (four points that will drop to just two next year when the three-year multiplier is applied, and then to zero after three years). That gives me a large margin of error regarding future CSA points.

But I have a huge concern about the fundamental unfairness and regulatory abuse that is built into CSA 2010. It visits injustices on hundreds of thousands of drivers who now fear for their careers.

A friend of mine, who I regard as a good driver and excellent FDCC contractor, has a number of CSA points on his record, almost all of them from minor equipment violations on fleet owner trucks. Because of the new rules, he has put off plans to buy a truck of his own because he fears that another ticket or two may force him off the road. He has the money for a truck. He has good credit. He has an exemplary customer service record. He is a capable and safe driver. And he may soon be looking for work off the road because of CSA 2010.

This man is making every effort to comply with the new rules as they are now known but that counts for nothing regarding past points retroactively applied. He does not enjoy the points cushion that Diane and I do (Diane has zero points), and he fears for his job.

Actually, he fears most the nit-picking scale cop that we all know is out there. That is the cop who thinks it is his or her job to write tickets and will look and look and look until a violation is found (or invented). That's the cop that can put my friend off the road, and that's the cop who is gleefully exercising the new power CSA gives to people like that.

Think also about owner-operators who have already committed to a truck and truck payments, only to find themselves forced off the road and into bankruptcy because over-zealous safety activists and blind bureaucrats saw fit not to give existing drivers the fair chance to modify their behavior but chose instead to apply new rules to past acts.

There are fundamental injustices built into CSA 2010, and that, ladies and gentlemen, concerns me deeply.

It should concern you too.

Retroactive rule making must not be permitted to become the norm. Diane and I, and thousands of carriers and owner-operators have been hurt by this in other ways. The reefer we once thought we could run for ten years under the rules in place when we bought it has been deemed illegal sooner than that. So too with our truck (at least until they change the rules again). These retroactive rules are costing truckers millions of dollars.

If retroactive rule making catches on in bureaucratic and legislative circles, how long will it be before our budget-stressed government officials decide to help themselves to your money by changing the tax rate tables under which you once made business plans and paid taxes? How long will it be before they come up with new retroactive tax rates and then come after you to pay your new fair share that they figure you should have paid in years past?

Retroactive rule making is a government technique for imposing special interest agendas and confiscating fairly earned wealth. Retroactive rule making is a parctice we should fear and stand against.

 

[cheri1122]

I am sorry you have misinterpreted my post in such a way.It wasnt intended the way you thought it is.
Uh huh. So - when you proclaim what folks 'should of done', [when it's too late to undo the damage] how else can that be interpreted, except as an expression of smug superiority?
As Phil pointed out, a driver who got tickets for minor equipment violations [ie: marker lights] on a truck he didn't own, [and had difficulty in getting repaired or being reimbursed for repairs] is now facing penalties that weren't applied at the time - that's simply unfair. Perhaps, had you ever been in the driver's seat for an owner who quarreled & quibbled over every dime, and delayed repayment of legitimate expenses, you'd have a different viewpoint. I understand, because I've driven a few miles in that seat. [And won't, ever again.]

I thought in a few of youre posts ago on this thread you said end of conversation?LOL......Thanks for the chuckle..

I was finished, but you had a couple questions, and, because I would like an answer when I post questions, I answered yours.
If you have no further questions.....

 

[greg334]

Hey Phil, don't you think that the CSA 2010 came around because of the level of professionalism that this industry has?

I seems with your rant about Terry proves that you are not ready for self-policing of the industry that we desperately need.

How many fellow contractors have you told about a violation you see on their truck or how many of those you told you turned in because they ignored you?

CSA 2010 came about to find the bad, not punish the good. It is not a perfect system and it won't be until you and others get involved.

You make a poor excuse with your example of the driver who is blamed for the owner's equipment, the rule is clear the driver is responsible for that equipment when he is driving, not the owner. This driver is not doing his job if he is blaming the owner for something that needs fixing and knowing about it. If he doesn't know about it, then he should not be behind the wheel.

 

[Moot]

After two intense courses on the subject of CSA 2010, I am satisfied that this is not the doom and gloom that everyone is talking about

I agree. This guy is still running down the road and he is missing more than a side marker light.

 

[Doggie Daddy]

I agree. This guy is still running down the road and he is missing more than a side marker light.

I think I saw that guy awhile back,in south Texas.