Battling HOS … again!
“The Teamsters are opposing this for the same reason the snake opposes the mongoose: They always have, so they always will.” –John Schulz, contributing editor, Logistics Management Magazine, on the international Brotherhood of Teamsters’ latest effort to nullify current hours of service regulations
This is getting ridiculous.
As you know, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, along with so-called “safety groups” Public Citizen, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, and the Truck Safety Coalition, re-filed a petition for reconsideration of the hours-of-service (HOS) regulations with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), seeking – yet again! – to dispatch these rules (put in place back in 2003) and replace them with the previous ones, which were originally formulated back in 1935.
“We have taken this action with the conviction, based on research and scientific data, that longer driving and working hours are unsafe and promote driver fatigue,” the letter the groups sent ot FMCSA said. “We challenged the two major features of the HOS rule that promote even greater driver fatigue: the provision increasing permissible consecutive driving hours from 10 hours to 11 hours and the provision commonly called the ‘34-hour restart,’ which enables drivers to drive and work substantially longer hours per week than under the HOS rules that prevailed until the 2003 HOS rule took effect.”
Ah, yes, the old bromides continue: adding an extra hour of drive time per day is just a time bomb waiting to explode, with truck drivers falling asleep at the wheel left and right while truck-car collisions and fatalities go through the roof.
Just one problem – none of that is happening.
Fatalities in large truck crashes have now dropped for three years in a row, from 5,240 in 2005 to 4,808 in 2007, a total decline of 8.2 percent. Those 4,808 fatalities in ’07, by the way, represent the lowest large truck fatality rate since 1992, and it is a 4.4 percent decrease from 2006.
Large truck fatal crashes also plummeted, falling from 4,551 in 2005 to 4,190 in 2007 – a total decline of 7.9 percent. On top of that 5,000 FEWER people were injured in large truck crashes in 2007 (101,000 overall) compared to 2006, a 4.7 percent reduction – with injuries in large truck crashes dropping steadily since a peak of 142,000 injuries in 1999.
Of course, the BIG bugaboo – the one all the so-called “safety groups” get hot under the collar about – is how many crashes occur in that 11th hour of driving. They predicted with breathless abandon that we’d see a huge increase in accidents within that 11th hour due to the new rules. But, hey, guess what? There’ve been just two in the last three years of available data – none in 2004, one in 2005, and none in 2006.
Even the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics is backing up those statistics, as its research shows the rate of occupational injuries and illnesses for the trucking industry fell by nearly 18 percent between 2004 and 2007.
Um … so how are the new rules contributing to crashes again?
Look, pardon my cynicism, but none of the brouhaha over HOS is even remotely about safety – it’s all about politics, as fellow wordsmith John Schulz at Logistics Management magazine (a guy who’s forgotten more about trucking than I know) so bluntly put in his own blog post about this subject.
“Sensing a political advantage with a Democrat in the White House, the [Teamsters] union and Public Citizen are once again asking for the rule to be modified,” Schulz said. “In general, the argument that these HOS changes have made the highways less safe is just false. The record proves otherwise.”
But to my mind it’s even worse. Look, if you don’t think the new rules work well, fine – but you can’t argue that they don’t help REDUCE fatigue. The HOS rules today gives drivers 10 hours of off-duty time; under the old rules – the ones the Teamsters and Public Citizen seek to restore – drivers only got EIGHT hours of off-duty time. That’s two hours LESS rest. And we want to go back to that?
Drivers also faced a 15 hour work day – 10 hours of drive time plus FIVE hours of loading/unloading time. Well, under the new rules, it got cut to 14 hours with only THREE hours offered for loading and unloading – the type of work that’s a major contributor to fatigue in the first place.
That’s why I term Public Citizen and the others “so-called” safety groups – because if they were really focused on safety, they’d seek to modify the current HOS rules; not throw them out and replace them with outdated regulations that offer less rest and more work.
If the Teamsters and these others REALLY want to work on safety, here are some suggestions. First, stop wasting everyone’s time battling over HOS. Second, pick up the gauntlet on some of these issues below:
Change the truck driver’s labor classification: We want truck drivers to be safety-first professionals, understand computers for billing and record-keeping purposes, work a 14 hour day … yet the truck driver’s job still remains classified as “unskilled” by the Department of Labor. If we want to hire and put the best people behind the wheel – people that drive safe, display good interpersonal skills, and intimately understand technology – you cannot designate the truck driver’s job as “unskilled labor.” It doesn’t wash. This designation needs to change, allowing for a major change in pay and benefit requirements for truckers. Driving an 80,000-pound tractor-trailer at 65 mph requires skill – pure and simple. Why don’t we work for that?
Waiting time penalties: Nothing causes more aggravation for driver and leads to more HOS violations than excessive wait times at shipper and receiver docks. I’ve seen wait time’s destructive impact up close – lines of trucks waiting to unload and load as an entire unionized warehouse workforce stops for lunch, or closes up at 5 p.m. on the dot. If the economy demands that trucking must be a 24/7 enterprise, everything that touches trucking must also share that 24/7 burden. Uncompensated wait time forces many drivers back on the road when tired or in violation of HOS rules simply so they can make a living. That is a direct threat to highway safety and so must be addressed. Why aren’t the Teamsters and Public Citizen fighting this?
Mandate safety technology: Former FMCSA Chief Administrator John Hill made a very valid point about trying to get the biggest “bang for the buck” when it came to reducing truck-related highway fatalities – and that came not from focusing on fatigue, but on the wider adoption of safety systems. “Look, every fatigue-related crash death is devastating – I wish we could make them all go away,” he explained in his last press conference with reporters in January. “But you’ve got to look at the total cost-benefit analysis. Is it worth mandating technology to address the cause of 1% to 2% of all fatal crashes [i.e. fatigue]? You need to put safety technology in place where you get the most benefit: roll stability control and adaptive cruise control systems, for example. This is where you can address 30% to 40% of crash causation: from a cost-benefit standpoint, this is what gets you the most bang for the buck.” So, why aren’t the Teamsters and Public Citizen pushing for incentives to get such technology onto ALL commercial trucks? Their voices – joined with those of the trucking industry, which supports the use of incentives to get wider adoption of these technologies – could help make a real dent in trucking related crash statistics.
It would be nice to see movement on these fronts, for they’d really do a whole lot more to improve highway safety from trucking’s angle than this continual wrangling over HOS that leads us nowhere.
But I won’t hold my breath.
March 13th, 2009 at 10:48 am
Your point about the classifications of truck drivers as unskilled laborers is a real sharp one - if that were changed, what would the impact be on the industry and on the availability of drivers?
There’s no driver shortage right now - but there probably will be when business picks up again, especially if the recovery comes fast when it does come. Would a change in the labor classification that better recognizes the high level of skill truck drivers are actually required to have attract more people to the profession?
As I see it, someone driving an 80,000 pound combination vehicle on the same highway as me better be skilled!
And do you have a link to brother Schulz’s blog entry?
March 13th, 2009 at 11:03 am
My bad! Sir Schulz’s analysis of the current HOS battle can be found below …
www.glgroup.com/News/Hey-Teamsters-Get-Over-it.-Truck-Driver-Hours-of-Service-Rules-Are-Here-to-Stay-35347.html
Thanks for writing in Sir Bill!
March 13th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
The Teamsters are nothing but a bunch of whinny ass cry babies anyhow. Just because their pampered drivers can’t handle the extra hour of driving doesn’t mean the rest of us men and women can’t. I probably wouldn’t mind the union’s but with “that’s not my job” way of doing buisness their day of usefulness is pretty much over. I’ve worked both union and non-union jobs and I’ll take a non-union job anyday! Yes I made a little less in the non-union job but the owners treated me with more respect and nicer bonuses. This editorial hits the nail right on the head. There are far more important issues to be addressed than the HOS and EOBR that would have a direct impact on safety. I guess these so called safety groups and the teamsters have nothing better to do than try and regulate peoples lives.
March 16th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Sean,
I no longer drive so the HOS discussion really has no affect on me. However, the safety issue associated with the extra hour of driving will pale in comparison to the safety issues that we’ll face if the DOT allows the current 80,000lb limit to increase. Our infrastructure that is so badly in need of repair (so I’ve read) will suffer further damage. Hauling 80,000lbs is stressful, think of the stress of 100,000lbs. You and I both know that equipment designed to haul 80K will be hauling 100K. Equipment failure leads to safety problems. Last but not leaset, drivers will be hauling more weight for the SAME $$.
Thank you,
Steve
March 16th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Following up on Joe’s comment - is there any data out there on how many drivers actually use the 11th hour? As I understand it, the 11th hour is 11 hours from when the driver turned the key - regardless of whether he or she took a one or two hour break sometime during their day. In that case, they may only drive 9 or 10 hours actually …
In the olden days, if I remember right, they could take up to two hours of break time off the clock, which meant they were often on the road for 11 or more hours a day in any case. For example: with 10 hours of driving time per day, Jim takes two hour-long breaks off the clock. Complete time from when he began his driving time until he stops that night, 12 hours. Then he had up to five hours of non-driving on-duty time available.
I’ve heard anecdotal evidence from carriers that the 11th hour does help them extend their range but that a lot of drivers don’t end up having to use it, anyway.
It would be great to see more discussion of how these HOS rules work in practice, not theory. Thanks to you and FO for raising the issue in the blog, Sean.
March 16th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
I haven’t seen any specific data on 11th hour usage, but I wholeheartedly agree with your point that such data would be very useful. You are correct across the board in your summation of the new and old rules — today, a driver can take a break anytime he or she likes, but it counts agaiants their 11 hour total. Under the old rule, a driver’s breaks did NOT count against their total — thus (in my humble opinion at least) creating far greater chances for fatigue than under the current rules.
I’ll do some more digging for the data points you suggested. Thanks for adding your voice to the debate, Sir Bill!
March 16th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Sean,
I’ll defer to William if I’m wrong but my understanding is that 11 hours is allowed for driving anytime during the 14 hour period from the beginning of the work day.
Steve
March 16th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
I have an idea about truck drivers being classified as a non skilled profession. I’m sure that you and others have thought of it as well. If they change the classification at the government level all the cities and counties will have to pay their trash collectors, plow operators etc more than minimum wage. So there is a built in lobby against that move. It will be hard to overcome.
Back in the day, there was no part of my job more stressful and tiring than waiting to load or unload. Having to unload a load of swingin’ meat in LA and then having to drive to Salinas or Fresno to get a return load meant that a holdup at the packing house could keep you up all night. Then you were late on your trip no matter where you were going. When the carrier fought for downtime the shippers would just say “we’ll just get someone else to haul for us.” That pretty much ended the conversation.
I’m not going to say that either of these problems will or will not be fixed, but I don’t think I’ll hold my breath. As far as the hours….I don’t hear a strong outcry from the man/woman behind the wheel so let them be the judge.
March 16th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Hey Steve M. — thanks for your comment.
You are correct that the driver can drive anytime within that 14 hour period, not exceeding a total of 11 hours. But the clock starts running the minute he turns the key in the ignition. So if he drives say 8 hours but took an hour break for lunch, his clock reads 9 hours. So if he spends 3 hours unloading, he’s at 12 hours and can only drive another 2 … even though that adds up with his previous 8 hours only to 10. That’s my understanding as to how the current rules work.
March 17th, 2009 at 7:19 am
Sean,
Re HOS: So, the new HOS actually lessen the allowed driving time in most cases. That seems counterproductive to me.
Steve
March 17th, 2009 at 8:17 am
It’s a case of overcorrection. The old rules allowed truck drivers to stop their driving clock almost indefinitely with breaks. The current rules sought to correct that by setting a firm time table that could not be stopped. Now, however, with the clock always running, many drivers complain they feel pressure not to take breaks because that would shorten their drive time and thus hurt their pay.
The current rules initially had a nice break option — the ’split sleeper berth’ provision — allowing the driver to stop the clock and take a two hour break; time ‘borrowned’ from their 10 hours of off-duty time, leaving them with 8 hours at the end of the work day. But FMCSA did away with that.
One thing is for certain Steve — the battle over HOS will only continue.
March 18th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Interesting point by Steve G. If a change in labor classification meant that truck drivers would have to be paid on a different scale and by different methods - that would rattle some cages. I’m surprised the Teamsters haven’t picked up on that - or would it also affect organizing?
One thing it might do is put an end to the perennial driver shortage. There doesn’t seem to be much of a shortage right now - Celadon had 10,000 applicants for 200 jobs in January - but ATA and others expect a sharp contraction in the driver labor pool when economic recovery arrives.
Know how long there’s been a driver shortage? As long as there have been trucks. I found this report in a 1914 issue of “The Traffic World” (I used to work there, but not that long ago … )
Dec. 12, 1914
The Truck Driver Problem
“Practically every truck manufacturer and nearly all employers complain of the great difficulty of securing drivers who are competent and who will work handling freight aside from those who drive horses. They are agreed that the profit or loss from truck transportation is largely dependent upon the drivers, and yet a majority of truck owners will hire the men who will work cheapest, entrusting valuable property in their keeping; and permitting them to determine how much work they will do. … The manufacturers and their representatives can do a great deal by exercising supervision over vehicles they build and sell, by advising purchasers of machines of competent drivers, or by training men to qualify them for positions. The owners, on their part, must expect to pay for the services of men who are worthy and are willing to promote the interests of their employers.”
Leave a Comment
Advertisement
About
Trucks at Work: Sean Kilcarr comments on trends affecting the many different strata of the trucking industry -- light and medium duty fleets up through over-the-road truckload, less-than-truckload, and private fleet operationsAdvertisement
Categories
Calendar
Archives
Your Account
Subscribe
Back to Top
© 2009 Penton Business Media, Inc.