The Sacramento Bee — sacbee.com — Rivals ahead for U.S. truckers

“I will probably end up replacing a number of my U.S. drivers with Mexican operators,” said Armando Freire, owner of a 30-vehicle trucking firm in San Diego and treasurer of the California Trucking Association.

I thought that was interesting that the treasurer of CTA just comes out and says he’s going to hire Mexicans. Is that a scare tactic? Or is he just looking for an excuse to exploit Mexican drivers instead of having to pay California drivers?

For California truckers, the competitive threat from Mexico is the latest in a series of woes. Truckers say sky-high diesel fuel costs have left them vulnerable to out-of-state drivers who buy cheaper fuel in Arizona or Nevada and then make deliveries in California. California diesel was selling for an average of $2.27 a gallon Wednesday compared with $2.15 in Nevada and $2.10 in Arizona, according to the American Automobile Association. The U.S. average is $1.81.

Out of state drivers aren’t competing directly with in-state trucking companies. I don’t think that will affect anything.

Now comes competition from drivers with access to even cheaper diesel. Freire said Mexico truckers can fill their tanks for about $1.60 a gallon – and have other cost advantages as well.

“We can’t compete with the cost of doing business, their labor costs against ours,” said Al Nunes, the trucking association’s president and owner of a Manteca trucking firm.

If Mexican trucks come across the CTA is just going to hire them.

And now California’s secret weapon.

Measure would impose air quality standards on Mexican trucks

By Michael Gardner, Copley News Service

SACRAMENTO — Alarmed that a Supreme Court decision could significantly erode hard-fought gains in cleaning the air, a California lawmaker Monday introduced legislation that would protect the state’s right to regulate soot-spewing diesel trucks from Mexico.

The legislation, Assembly Bill 1009, would require that all trucks crossing into California meet federal emission standards set for that model year. The newer the model, the tougher the requirements.

Not real sure if that’s going to work. That might keep out the older ones. Especially since in the same article it says:

The California Air Resources Board carries out inspections at CHP weigh stations, ports and border crossings of all trucks regardless of origin. There already is some limited access of Mexican trucks to the U.S. but carriers are confined to a relatively small area.

One in six California-based trucks flunk. The failure rate for Mexican trucks is expected to be twice that, according to air board figures.

California can’t even keep their own trucks running clean.

The California border would be overwhelmed. They not only have to watch their border with Mexico, but with Arizona and Nevada to catch trucks coming from mainland Mexico, not just Baja. It would be an enforcement nightmare, but I’m sure California would find a way.

Originally posted 2008-06-08 20:36:42.

Trucking firms need to keep drivers on road – 2000-07-17 – Business First of Buffalo

Mike Hoggard, vice president of Turner Transfer in Greensboro, N.C., said his company loses very few drivers. Hoggard thinks pay is what drivers primarily care about.

“You can offer them all kinds of benefits, but when it comes right down to it, all they care about is money,” Hoggard said.

“The cost of transportation is going to go up, because you’re going to have to pay people to stay in this business. Maybe in the future, truck drivers will make $90,000, while computer people will only make $30,000. Some trucking companies are bringing in people from outside the country to drive.”

But wait, this was in 2000. And he said it, not me. “Some trucking companies are bringing in people from outside the country to drive.”

And how about this one?

Back in the driver’s seat – 1996-12-16 – Dallas Business Journal

But a continued shortage of truck drivers has transportation companies in the Metroplex stealing one another’s drivers by offering — not country music — but sign-on bonuses, pay raises and guarantees of getting home regularly.

Wait, that was in 1996! There’s been a driver shortage all this time? But people are still getting their stuff and freight is still moving (cheaply).

Now something from today’s driver shortage -

Driver shortages may put trucking’s boom in park – 2004-08-09 – The Business Journal of Kansas City

Driver shortages may put trucking’s boom in park
Rob Roberts
Staff Writer

Christmas is more than four months away, but the holiday rush starts now for the trucking industry, which is greeting the season with a driver shortage.

So we better get cracking. What’s the solution? It’s all about the money. Period. You can send people to Iraq to drive trucks for a year, pay them enough and they will stand in line for hours just to sign up.

Maybe in the future, truck drivers will make $90,000, while computer people will only make $30,000.

The future is now. Computer people are a dime a dozen (I was one) and getting their jobs sent overseas. All this talk about driver shortages, companies need to start paying up. The cost for a loaf of bread may rise, but it’s going to anyway.

Originally posted 2004-08-14 15:04:42.

We’re all on pins and needles waiting to see if we go back to the old rules and hopefully the court is in no rush to make a decision. In the meantime we sit back and watch the bickering back and forth.

Public Citizen, on the other hand, asserted in a brief filed on September 13 that the risks to public safety and drivers’ health are greater than the any negative economic or regulatory impact a reversion to the old rules would present. “From a highway standpoint alone, a single fatality that results from the fact that under the new, invalidated rules truck drivers can now drive will cost the public significantly more in pure monetary terms than the transition expenses that will be borne by any of the largest motor carriers.

The rules that give us more rest and force shippers to be more efficient are a danger to the public highways. And reversing those rules that the evil Bush administration pushed down the poor truckers throats and endangers the public safety are worth destroying the best economic and trucking recovery we’ve seen in a long time. They have no proof that the new rules are better or worse, they just know they’re bad.

FMCSA accused Public Citizen of overstating the agency’s ability to initiate a smooth and quick transition back to the old rules. “Petitioner’s argument…reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the harm and a persistent misconstruction of the statutes and regulations governing enforcement of those requirements,” FMCSA stated.

Why don’t they come out and say that Public Citizen has no idea what’s going on in the real world?

It’s not the driving that makes drivers tired, it’s the free labor and waiting on the docks to get loaded that gets most of us down. The old rules of 10-8-10-8 were tough to do if you were scheduled real tight. After 10 hours (or more) of driving you get eight hours to sleep, eat, shower and whatever else needs to be done. Compared to the new rules, drive for awhile, stop for 10, have time to shower, eat and relax a little, plus sleep for an entire 8 hours. If you’ve been sitting on the dock all day, you have to stop at 14 hours no matter what. I love the 34 hour reset. I never understood why what I did 7 days ago affects how much I drive today.

Even though I can drive more (and make more money) I have to rest more. Why can’t they see that? If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a thousand times, it’s not about safety, it’s about agenda.

Originally posted 2004-09-21 18:52:25.

Studies clash on safety impact of hours rule
By Max Heine

A study released today by an insurance trade group says the new hours-of-service rule has resulted in truckers driving more and being slightly more fatigued than under the old rule.

However, a new report from the American Trucking Associations shows that the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety study is “bogus, as usual,” said ATA spokesman Mike Russell.

Just come out and say what you mean Mike, don’t hold back. I wouldn’t trust any study done by ATA either. They are for the industry’s productivity, not the driver’s welfare.

While the drivers responding to the IIHS study said their sleep time had increased under the new rule, they reported slightly more instances than when the old rule was in effect of driving drowsy or falling asleep at the wheel. When drivers were asked about dozing at the wheel at least once in the past month, the reported percentage increased from 13 percent in 2003 to 15 percent in 2004.

Help me out with this one. Their sleep time has increased, but they’re more tired? And not just tired, but "drowsy".

But look what we have here, a study done about truckers and sleep (that I’ve mentioned before here) that says 28% of commercial drivers have a sleep disorder.  No matter how much sleep time they get, maybe they are not getting the restorative rest they need.

Sleep: At The Wheel With Sleep Apnea!.

Investigators found that "persons with untreated sleep apnea perform as poorly on simulated steering and psychomotor reaction time tests as legally intoxicated individuals."  They also noted that the prevalence of obstructed sleep apnea in drivers is estimated at 3%, or 4.7 million drivers. A recent study of 1,391 commercial truck drivers found that 28% had obstructive sleep apnea, with more than one-third characterized as moderate to severe.

A third (moderate to severe) of 28% is about 9% which almost matches the above number of drowsy drivers on the other study. Those drivers are going to be tired no matter how much sleeper time they get. How about doing something for THEM without messing with the rest of us! Like maybe this! Back to the original article.

"The new rule was supposed to improve safety, but our survey
shows the opposite,” says Anne McCartt, IIHS vice president for
research. “Truckers are using the restart provision to squeeze even
more driving hours into the week."

A work week restart provision of the current rule, requiring 34
hours off, increases allowable driving hours in a seven-day period from
60 to 77. The rule lengthens the mandatory rest period by two hours but
lets drivers stay on the road an extra hour every day.

Is that 34 hour restart great or what?! Granted I drive and work more, but I sleep more too.  If I’m away from home, I want to work, not have to sit around a truck stop.

A quarter of drivers who were surveyed by IIHS said they drive
more than the new daily limit of 11 hours. Eight of 10 drivers said
they’re taking advantage of the restart provision that allows them to
drive 25 percent more in a week.

I bet those same drivers drove more than the 10 hours on the old rules. It’s not really the drivers fault. In theory and what the goverment wants you to do is stop driving after 11 hours, period. Companies (most if not all) tell drivers they are allowed a certain average mph. If I’m stuck in rush hour or bad weather or even driving on back roads, I still drive on my log that same average. Such as: On the interstate where the speed limit may be 65 mph, I’m allowed to drive 627 miles (57mph * 11 hours). If part of that 627 miles is during rush hour you’re not going to be able to average 57.  But my logbook would still show 627 miles in 11 hours. In reality I drive until the job is done for the day. It may take a little longer than 11 hours.

Honestly, I used to do that, but not so much anymore. Very seldom do we have to drive a full 11 hours or more a day to get where I’m going on time. Since most of our deliveries require coordination with crews, labor or regular business hours, getting there early doesn’t neccassarily give me an advantage.  But that is the way it is for the majority of drivers and companies encourage this practice.

The ATA study, based on government accident records and data from
70 carriers operating under the new rule, was presented March 10 to the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration as comment on the possible
revision of the hours rule. ATA asks that the rule receive no major
changes.

Among ATA’s findings:

• While total DOT recordable accidents and preventable DOT
  recordable accidents remained relatively consistent, there were
  decreases between 2003 and 2004 in total injuries and injuries related
  to DOT recordable accidents.
• The 34-hour recovery and restart help to avoid the shifting of
  daytime to nighttime schedules, which can affect the circadian rhythm
  and decrease alertness.

I have no idea how that’s supposed to fix anything besides letting me work more. Besides why should what I did last week have anything to do with what I’m doing today.

• By increasing the daily off-duty requirement to 10 continuous
  hours, the new rules greatly reduced the possibility of chronic sleep
  deprivation and the development of a sleep debt during a driver’s
  workweek.
• With minor modifications to accommodate better use of sleeper
  berths and the promotion of naps, the rule should continue to prove
  highly useful in assuring the overall safety of the nation’s highways.

That’s cute! Everyone get your blanky, it’s nappy time! I don’t care how many hours we are supposed to log as ’sleeping’, if someone doesn’t want to sleep, they’re not going to. They have to keep a "split-sleeper berth" option available to keep teams productive.

Enforcement of work hours has long been a problem because written
log books are easily falsified, said IIHS. Its survey shows about a
third of drivers say they at least occasionally omit work hours from
their logs.

"Without electronic recorders the rule can’t be enforced effectively," McCartt said.

Russell said FMCSA compliance data shows that only about 8 percent of drivers cheat on their logs.

The agenda raises it’s ugly head. Okay, I put in the boldness, but it jumped out at me like that from the original article.  I’m really, really sick and freakin’ tired of people thinking that some electronic recorder black box thing is going to fix everything.  The problem is not driving time. The problem is work time.  Uncompensated, unfair, unnecessary, undocumented, unlogged work and wait time. How is a black box going to know the difference between four hours in the sleeper berth and four hours loading or unloading??? Even if it could, how’s it going to know if I’m sleeping or waiting and having to listen to the CB for my dock number and unable to sleep?

What about people that need more than eight hours? What about them? Drivers with a sleep disorder can "sleep" for 12 hours a day and still be tired enough to doze at the wheel. Believe me I know. 

The solution? I don’t know. I have a few ideas. I like the new hours the way they are. Black boxes aren’t going to fix the problems people think they are going to fix. Enforcing companies to comply is a start. Now the companies blame the driver or owner operator for any log violations, accidents or anything else. When the driver is only trying to comply with the companies orders.

Originally posted 2005-03-14 01:31:00.

Back then I would stop to help someone along the road, because I was as dependable as the cell phones and satellites they now have. If it was another truck I probably knew him. We would work on a problem together to get him going again. I wouldn’t have to worry about being left stranded myself because I knew he would help me without asking.

Back when the CB was one of our most modern tools and it was used as such. Everyone was professional, helped each other and respected each other on the radio as they did in person.

My first impression of truckers was when I was a kid and we were on the family vacation. I don’t even remember where we were going or coming from. I do remember being in a major traffic jam and the trucker next to us tossing lollipops from his truck to us kids in the back seat. We missed some, we caught some. I think it helped everyone pass the time. Back when we didn’t have to worry about candy being laced with anything but too much sugar.

Back then I had the reputation of a professional. People wrote songs about me, made movies about me and they were in awe when I told someone proudly I was a trucker. There were the outlaws among us that got all the press, just like the outlaws of the old west. But mostly we were respected. We knew every little crook and cranny of this country like the wrinkles on our wind beaten and calloused hands. We were depended upon not only to help a lost tourist but to lend someone a hand with only a thank you as a reward.

Too bad I’ve only been driving for 5 years. Because that’s the trucking I signed up for. Not today’s traffic and abuse. Truck stops today are like McDonald’s, they all look the same, inside and out with no individual character. I’ve seen all 48 and most of Canada more than a few times. That sounds impressive, but from the interstate you don’t see much. I can’t even listen to the CB while I drive because of the abusive, vulgar, trash talking. Some drivers can’t even be bothered to wave, thanks to a cell phone in one hand and trying to steer, shift and drink coffee with the other. And thanks to my coworkers fine example, I can’t even pull into a mall parking lot without being harassed by some junior security nazi.

I’m sure my fantasy of how it used to be and how it really was is probably two completely different realities. So be it. This is still the trucking I signed up for. I’m proud of what I do. I tell everyone that the worst day trucking is better than the best day I ever had in any office.

Originally posted 2008-05-28 20:35:27.

Claybrook: highway fatality statistics get ’spin’

Claybrook, in a release issued Aug. 10, stated that the “historic low” in highway deaths, an .8 percent reduction from 2002, was only part of a steady historic decline — 46 percent between 1982 and 2002, and not really news.

The number of highway deaths for 2003 was the lowest since record keeping began 29 years ago; although the number of fatalities involving large trucks grew slightly, from 4,939 to 4,986, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

NHTSA’s “latest spin also downplays the real news in the numbers — that 42,643 people lost their lives on the road last year,” Claybrook said.

Claybrook maintained that the Department of Transportation had done an “about face.” She said that NHTSA Administrator Dr. Jeffrey Runge in 2003 said a declining death rate was not cause for celebration and predicted highway fatalities could reach 50,000 annually by the year 2008.

Now, however, “the emphasis has shifted to death rates rather than real numbers,” Claybrook said.

It must be me. Someone explain what this woman is saying. Aren’t death rates real numbers? Deaths went down, but she’s not happy until it’s zero? Sorry, don’t think that’s going to happen.

At least she didn’t bring up trucks. Whose numbers are about the same under 5,000. And the ATA had to put their two cents in saying that

…most truck crashes involve at least one passenger vehicle and that errors by passenger car drivers cause up to 75 percent of car-truck crashes.

These people are completely insane.

Originally posted 2008-11-25 02:00:00.