Hours Of Disservice?
If we don't act appropriately, this could be an expensive, futile effort.
Deborah Whistler
Editor
Most truckers breathed a sigh of relief when they got word of the new hours of service regulations released by the feds. While most hadn't had time to do any detailed analysis of the changes, everyone we talked to agreed they were a vast improvement over those released in 2000.
Although these rules appear to be more trucker friendly than the first go-around (see cover story), they are still going to pose problems.
One of the first will be additional pressure on the nation's already inadequate truck parking infrastructure. Truckers will have to park longer in one spot than under current rules. But where?
There is already an acute shortage of truck parking in many areas of the country, and it will undoubtedly worsen next January when the new rules take effect. There will probably be more trucks on the highways. And when those trucks are parked, they will supposedly stay parked for 10 hours at a time. Truckers will need places to stop with facilities available to help them get the rest they need to stay safe on the road.
Government has been pushing for commercialization of rest areas as a solution to the truck parking shortage. One proposal is part of the Bush administration's highway reauthorization bill. But it is being strongly opposed by the truckstop lobby, which contends that offering commercial services at rest areas will put truckstops out of business.
It's also a battle for anyone constructing new truckstops. People want the stuff trucks bring, but they don't want truckstops in their back yards. How to provide adequate and plentiful facilities for truck drivers is a huge problem now, and threatens to become even larger in this new environment.
Another issue will be how to get drivers adequate miles/pay while increasing their rest time.
Truckers sitting at the dock will be on the clock under the new rules. But for them to make money, the wheels need to be turning. Carriers will no longer be able to place the burden of shipper inefficiencies on the backs of their drivers.
That is, of course, if they play by the rules. But there is a loophole in the new rules that could put unscrupulous carriers and desperate drivers in a position to bend the rules, just as some do now.
A sleeper berth exemption included in the new rules apparently allows for rest taken in the bunk to be split into two periods, providing each is at least two hours in duration.
Here's a scenario: Driver is stuck at the dock for several hours. By the time the load moves, he has lost five hours of his 14-hour workday. But the dispatcher is pushing for the load. And the driver is paid by the mile, not by how long he's been sitting.
With the split-time sleeper berth exemption, that driver could log the time at the dock as a rest period in the sleeper. He could then proceed to drive for 11 hours before taking another break. He could probably drive for 14 hours and not take breaks, but log that he has. He could then stop for five hours (to make up his mandatory 10 hours off) before hitting the road again.
Most truckers were relieved that the requirement for mandatory electronic logs was dropped from the rules. It would have been a financial burden for many carriers that don't need the devices for operational purposes. But realistically, electronic logs were the only means by which enforcement of the rules could be assured.
The opportunity for creative logging is still there. And owner-operator sources have predicted there will be more abuse under the new rules than the old.
The basics of the new rules make sense. But the broader issues that lead to fatigue are still here.
Unless fleets insist that drivers aren't kept waiting for loads at shippers' docks, drivers will bend the rules to get the miles.
If the government doesn't find a way to provide adequate parking for drivers to get their rest, they will cheat on their logs and just keep moving.
If this industry can't find a way for truckers to make a decent living while obeying the rules designed to keep them safe, abuses will continue. And highway safety is more likely to diminish than improve.
