Who Needs FMCSA? We Have OOIDA!
- Thread starter Injun
- Start date
Copperhead
Well-Known Member
I do it similarly to Rubber Duck. When I get to the customer, I bump to On Duty. I check in, I bump the dock or whatever, after approx 10-15 min gets ticked off on ON DUTY, I switch to OFF DUTY or SLEEPER. Very little editing except for those times that I stopped somewhere and forgot to change over to OFF DUTY and the box went to ON DUTY on its own. I could see where editing the box and it shows considerable bouncing back and forth between on duty and off duty would attract someone's attention. I do much the same at the beginning of my 14 for a pre-trip. I do whatever I need to do, using as much time as necessary, then when I know I a about ready to leave, I switch to on duty for 10-15 min and put the final touches on what I need to do before taking off, and then go. Is this absolutely, positively following each and every interpretation of the regs? OF COURSE NOT. But it is so difficult to detect by even the most anal of FMCSA inspectors. Keep in mind, when these guys are doing an audit at a company, they don't want to do any more than you do when you do your job. There are more flagrant violations that catch their eye before they are going to analyze in deepest scrutiny each and every moment to a log to determine if there was something amiss. Especially if the truck does not move. Without the truck moving, and it showing up via the GPS in the box, there is really nothing major to catch their attention.
I just wonder if some folks don't try to make this more difficult than it really is. I have come to believe over the years, that paranoia must be a genetic trait. I just have never been that scared of FMCSA, DOT, the cops, or that little box that is recording the truck movements. In over 30 years, I have never had a log violation and one speeding ticket. Yet I have done most, if not all, the similar things that others do. You just have to use a little common sense, which is so rare these days.
I just wonder if some folks don't try to make this more difficult than it really is. I have come to believe over the years, that paranoia must be a genetic trait. I just have never been that scared of FMCSA, DOT, the cops, or that little box that is recording the truck movements. In over 30 years, I have never had a log violation and one speeding ticket. Yet I have done most, if not all, the similar things that others do. You just have to use a little common sense, which is so rare these days.
I run legal 100% of the time.
Logging Off Duty Driving while backing in or any time while under dispatch is falsification. That is something that will be caught. Also, Off Duty Driving cannot be edited. No driving time can be edited.
All I am doing is allowing the system to place me On Duty, taking care of the dock stuff, exiting through the front of the store so I can use the bathroom or buy something and editing in my Off Duty time when I return to the truck...or vice versa. I don't see where I have to donate time used for going to the bathroom or shopping to DOT...or Swift, for that matter.
Dropping at a WalMart is not like going to a DC, a supplier or a construction site. I am allowed to leave the property if I want to. Therefore, I am allowed to log my time (time not spent on the dock unloading) as Off Duty. That's according to FMCSA and Swift.
They would rather I waste 10 minutes walking back and forth to change the log than just get my stuff done and fix it when I get back. Editing is a lawful function of the Nag.
Logging Off Duty Driving while backing in or any time while under dispatch is falsification. That is something that will be caught. Also, Off Duty Driving cannot be edited. No driving time can be edited.
All I am doing is allowing the system to place me On Duty, taking care of the dock stuff, exiting through the front of the store so I can use the bathroom or buy something and editing in my Off Duty time when I return to the truck...or vice versa. I don't see where I have to donate time used for going to the bathroom or shopping to DOT...or Swift, for that matter.
Dropping at a WalMart is not like going to a DC, a supplier or a construction site. I am allowed to leave the property if I want to. Therefore, I am allowed to log my time (time not spent on the dock unloading) as Off Duty. That's according to FMCSA and Swift.
They would rather I waste 10 minutes walking back and forth to change the log than just get my stuff done and fix it when I get back. Editing is a lawful function of the Nag.
Gus
What?
It's a long way back to the truck. Once the truck stops forward motion, it switches to on duty not driving. By the time you back in to a door, enough time has elapsed to go off duty.
Just because a company wants it done a certain way doesn't make it wrong. Quit being stubborn to change and do it the way they want.
The other option us to get your own truck and authority, accept all responsibility and go it on your own.
Just because a company wants it done a certain way doesn't make it wrong. Quit being stubborn to change and do it the way they want.
The other option us to get your own truck and authority, accept all responsibility and go it on your own.
R
Racer X 69
Guest
So you don't go back out to the truck and set the e-nag back to off duty after checking in because it is a long walk back out to the truck then?
Yep. Laziness and it's a waste of my time.
R
Racer X 69
Guest
Laziness. One of the human traits, shared with most creatures, animal, insect, plant. Nothing to be ashamed of, and certainly nothing to be persecuted for.
**** the e-logs.
**** FMCSA.
**** the government.
**** the world.
Well, most of it anyway.
R
Racer X 69
Guest
As I said, FTW!
Tim
U.S.Constitution
Think I'll ask [MENTION=8932]blackw900[/MENTION] if he wants to go in half with me and send OOIDA $100 in your name.
Think I'll ask @blackw900 if he wants to go in half with me and send OOIDA $100 in your name.
I'm a little tapped out right now....I spent all my money on Bookers, Beer and Chick-fil-a today....Call me whenever I decide to go back to work and we'll talk about donating money in the old broads name.
You crack me up....You're upset that they didn't agree with you on this and now you're having a little tantrum and saying you'll never give them a dime again.
As with all of the other OOIDA naysayers, You have decided to ignore the fact that they do a lot of good for O/O's in general and for company drivers as well because they wouldn't hold your hand on your personal issue.
The naysayers complain that OOIDA hasn't got enough clout to get things done while saying..."I'll never give them a dime!"
Where do you all suppose the clout is supposed to come from?
Here, I'll help you.....Membership numbers and activism by those members.
OOIDA gets a lot of attention in Washington in spite of the fact that the membership is as small as it is and a lot of people expect a lot of personal attention for their stinkin' 25 bucks a year.
But hey....YOUR CARRIER is an ATA member, An organization that has actively worked against small business truckers for years.
Maybe they'll come to your aid!
I'm to a point that I have a tough time trusting any of them. I'm tired of the whole mess right now. I'm tired of the company creating its own rules and, yes, using the electronic nag as a tool to crawl up my ass. I didn't expect OOIDA to jump right in and hold my hand, or to do anything at all. I just didn't expect them to jump right on the ATA bandwagon.
I thought they wanted to know about instances of harassment via the QC and electronic log. I thought they wanted to know about exactly how the tool is being used against lease ops/owner ops and drivers. I thought they might be interested to know how far it is being pushed to control drivers. I did not expect the response I got both times I called. Essentially, they didn't even want to know. I felt like I was inconveniencing them by giving them information.
To force a lease or owner op onto electronic logs, then say that driver cannot use a lawful function of the required equipment is ridiculous. They want me to log what I do, and I do so to the best of my ability. The company (and, apparently, DOT) don't like how I do it...well, do they want accurate logs or not? Where does OOIDA fit in this? How about taking the information they had apparently asked for before?
OOIDA is fighting EOBRs on grounds of driver harassment. I give them an example of exactly that. Since it doesn't fit into their little model of harassment, it's poopoohed. This is why I'm frustrated with OOIDA.
I thought they wanted to know about instances of harassment via the QC and electronic log. I thought they wanted to know about exactly how the tool is being used against lease ops/owner ops and drivers. I thought they might be interested to know how far it is being pushed to control drivers. I did not expect the response I got both times I called. Essentially, they didn't even want to know. I felt like I was inconveniencing them by giving them information.
To force a lease or owner op onto electronic logs, then say that driver cannot use a lawful function of the required equipment is ridiculous. They want me to log what I do, and I do so to the best of my ability. The company (and, apparently, DOT) don't like how I do it...well, do they want accurate logs or not? Where does OOIDA fit in this? How about taking the information they had apparently asked for before?
OOIDA is fighting EOBRs on grounds of driver harassment. I give them an example of exactly that. Since it doesn't fit into their little model of harassment, it's poopoohed. This is why I'm frustrated with OOIDA.
Similar threads
