Let me say, first and foremost, that no training company will EVER be offered advertisement on my web site, save for one. While I may offer trucking schools advertisement, so people will know where to obtain their CDL, it is a conscious and moral decision Lou and I have made not to allow companies who repeatedly show unsafe training exercises space on my site, or an endorsement by us, in any form or matter.
I caught a lot of flack when I first wrote about training reform. (Click here for the full article.)
Anyone that is on the nation's highways, four-wheelers and truckers alike, observe near misses by training companies daily. If you don't, I want to run where you run. This is due to a lack of stern training guidelines. While I may be against regulation, I am for regulation on this subject matter. This is a public safety issue and an imagery issue. Every time one of these students swerves toward, cuts off, tailgates, etc someone, it leaves a bad taste toward ALL truckers, not just the name on the door.
We all know there has to be a place to learn, and training companies are supposed to be able to do this in a safe manner. Yet, when some are boasting they'll have you in your own truck within SEVENTEEN days, training with a new driver themselves, while boasting a 99.99% safety rating last I checked, how is this safe???? (For the non-truckers, safety ratings are between 1 and 100%, and the closer you are to 100, the worse.)
What will it take for the FMCSA, with Ferro claiming her "main concern is safety," to finally do something about this issue? After all, the FCC fatality and others were not enough. Will it take a loud public outcry to the Feds? I still believe so. Bringing this issue to public attention, and not just within the industry, is key to succeeding in making the roads a little more safe.
What should be the federal guidelines? I still agree with Tim Brady's ideology behind this:
The first step to improving highway safety from the trucking side of the issue is: 6 months classroom and trucking course with at least 240 hours of behind the wheel instruction.
6 months with a qualified "licensed" driver trainer (5 years 500,000 miles driving experience with no accidents and no more than 3 points on their CDL DMV report plus completing a course and exam to be a "Licensed" Driver Trainer). The driver trainer must always be in the right seat awake, observing and instructing the trainee. Under no circumstances can a driver trainer be in the sleeper while the trainee is driving.
I will go furthermore in stating that there should be a psychological evaluation of anyone wanting to pursue trainer status as a career. The reason behind this is due to the horrors of trainee abuse that happen. Lou spoke to a trainee the other day who's trainer beat him with a Qualcomm for taking the wrong highway. If you're not psychologically able to handle stress, you should be disqualified.
Would this be a costly venture for the trucking industry? Well, yes it would be, but so are wrongful death suits and suits for damage of loads and people. So, in the end, the up front cost would make it more cost effective.
Today, Werner trailer #27030 passed us, hogging the fog line while we were oversized. He almost slammed into us and our load. He was sitting with his face two inches from the windshield, with a death grip on the steering wheel. Werner informed me this was a student driver, and I told them the trainer was in the back. He was done with his observational period, so he could drive alone. I explained to Werner that based on his performance, he was still needing observational. We've had the same issues with CRST (don't call them, the person who answered seemed to not comprehend the English language when a Haz-Mat load was swerving erratically), Swift, C.R. England, Stevens, and even once with TMC. The trainees, plain and simple, need more training experience.
I think the worst is the simple fact that if the trainees claim they need more practice, the companies will either send them out on their own anyways or fire them. A major reason why is if they send them out, it's often in a lease truck, making the company more money through the flease program, or it's more cost effective to fire them and sue them for the schooling (both have happened at more than one company.
Despite if you like me, despite if you like Tim, despite if you like said companies, unite for this one. The four wheeler next on the improperly trained trainee's path may be your family!
I'm assigning three Senators to write (I guess I should've informed them first, but it's all good). Write them, ask for these reform practices to be made into law.
Click here for the petition. I will hand deliver this to lawmakers in August.
You know what to do. Write, (sound professional), like, tweet, post, repeat! Let's get this huge black eye dealt with!
I caught a lot of flack when I first wrote about training reform. (Click here for the full article.)
Anyone that is on the nation's highways, four-wheelers and truckers alike, observe near misses by training companies daily. If you don't, I want to run where you run. This is due to a lack of stern training guidelines. While I may be against regulation, I am for regulation on this subject matter. This is a public safety issue and an imagery issue. Every time one of these students swerves toward, cuts off, tailgates, etc someone, it leaves a bad taste toward ALL truckers, not just the name on the door.
We all know there has to be a place to learn, and training companies are supposed to be able to do this in a safe manner. Yet, when some are boasting they'll have you in your own truck within SEVENTEEN days, training with a new driver themselves, while boasting a 99.99% safety rating last I checked, how is this safe???? (For the non-truckers, safety ratings are between 1 and 100%, and the closer you are to 100, the worse.)
What will it take for the FMCSA, with Ferro claiming her "main concern is safety," to finally do something about this issue? After all, the FCC fatality and others were not enough. Will it take a loud public outcry to the Feds? I still believe so. Bringing this issue to public attention, and not just within the industry, is key to succeeding in making the roads a little more safe.
What should be the federal guidelines? I still agree with Tim Brady's ideology behind this:
The first step to improving highway safety from the trucking side of the issue is: 6 months classroom and trucking course with at least 240 hours of behind the wheel instruction.
6 months with a qualified "licensed" driver trainer (5 years 500,000 miles driving experience with no accidents and no more than 3 points on their CDL DMV report plus completing a course and exam to be a "Licensed" Driver Trainer). The driver trainer must always be in the right seat awake, observing and instructing the trainee. Under no circumstances can a driver trainer be in the sleeper while the trainee is driving.
I will go furthermore in stating that there should be a psychological evaluation of anyone wanting to pursue trainer status as a career. The reason behind this is due to the horrors of trainee abuse that happen. Lou spoke to a trainee the other day who's trainer beat him with a Qualcomm for taking the wrong highway. If you're not psychologically able to handle stress, you should be disqualified.
Would this be a costly venture for the trucking industry? Well, yes it would be, but so are wrongful death suits and suits for damage of loads and people. So, in the end, the up front cost would make it more cost effective.
Today, Werner trailer #27030 passed us, hogging the fog line while we were oversized. He almost slammed into us and our load. He was sitting with his face two inches from the windshield, with a death grip on the steering wheel. Werner informed me this was a student driver, and I told them the trainer was in the back. He was done with his observational period, so he could drive alone. I explained to Werner that based on his performance, he was still needing observational. We've had the same issues with CRST (don't call them, the person who answered seemed to not comprehend the English language when a Haz-Mat load was swerving erratically), Swift, C.R. England, Stevens, and even once with TMC. The trainees, plain and simple, need more training experience.
I think the worst is the simple fact that if the trainees claim they need more practice, the companies will either send them out on their own anyways or fire them. A major reason why is if they send them out, it's often in a lease truck, making the company more money through the flease program, or it's more cost effective to fire them and sue them for the schooling (both have happened at more than one company.
Despite if you like me, despite if you like Tim, despite if you like said companies, unite for this one. The four wheeler next on the improperly trained trainee's path may be your family!
I'm assigning three Senators to write (I guess I should've informed them first, but it's all good). Write them, ask for these reform practices to be made into law.
Click here for the petition. I will hand deliver this to lawmakers in August.
You know what to do. Write, (sound professional), like, tweet, post, repeat! Let's get this huge black eye dealt with!
RSS Feed