This is trlrider's Profile page. Use it to view trlrider's comments, other users' replies to these comments, and comments trlrider has endorsed.

What's Happening Now

April 10, 2010 2:35 am

Quote: ” CMV Commercial Motor Vehicle drivers who text were 23 times more likely to have a “safety critical event” than non-texters.”End Quote
While I find this statistic interesting, since this is a rule FMCSA is trying to shove on CMV operators, since that is their only jurisdiction, multiple other studies have shown, that as a whole, any driver that is distracted by texting is anywhere from 20 to 50% more likely to have a critical incident, then non-texting drivers. Other studies have also shown, that in incident involving a CMV and a non-CMV, that over 80% of the time, the non-CMV operator is at fault. But, because the general motoring public would scream murder and boot the congressman and senator out of office at the next election if they messed with their cell phones… more »

…and texting priviledge, the government as a whole, will only pick on the one segment of highway users that they have ultimate jurisdiction over, and the is CMV operators. Note for those not in the know, the federal government has very limited power, if any at all, over the general motoring public. Laws and Enforcement of those laws on the General public falls on the individual states.
While there are some bad actors as they say in the trucking industry, the majority are safer and more concious of their surroundings then the average general driver. « less
April 11, 2010 1:01 pm

In-Cab video devices are used by a rare few companies, more for time – motion studies for looking at ways to save cost, more so, than keeping tabs on the drivers themselves. Another problem with in-cab systems is invasion of privacy, which always becomes a debate when discussing HOS and other regulatory means. Trying to implement this type of system just in fleet trucks would be near impossible, then you add in the million plus Owner Operators that not only not allow such intrusions, but could not afford the technology to start with. As stated in a previous post, the only way that such a regulation would be enforceable, would be to regulate the technology and the providers to such, that motion over a set speed would disable the devices ability to text. This would have to be done on… more »

…a nationwide basis, and effect every one that owns such a device. Oh can you hear the cries now. “It is my right to use my device anywhere, anytime” < sorry Charlie – Driving is not a right, it is a privilege enabled by the states. « less
April 13, 2010 12:48 pm

Focusing on the consequences of suspending a CDL license is important. In the texting rule’s current form, a CDL license suspension would likely not occur until after the CMV driver received at least one prior texting violation. Do you think imposing a fine for the first texting violation is a sufficient warning?

April 11, 2010 7:49 pm

This is an interesting suggestion.

The NPRM in its current form includes an exception in Section 392.80 for:

“2) Texting is permissible by drivers of a commercial motor vehicle when necessary to communicate with law enforcement officials or other emergency services.”

Do you think that this exception would be sufficient to address your concerns?

Section 392.80

April 11, 2010 3:35 pm

One issue not explicitly mentioned here is that the use of speed or motion based disablement technologies seems based on the assumption that a driver is unaccompanied while working. Are there technologies which overcome this issue? Even if there are, is this the type of technology that truckers, employers, citizens, etc. would like to see in their vehicles?

April 10, 2010 6:07 am

Welcome to Regulation Room and thank you for your thoughtful comments.

Do you think that the cab video data recorders should be required in every cab? Do you think that this could be a more effective way to enforce the proposed texting regulation?

April 10, 2010 6:11 am

Trlrider, this is a very interesting proposal.

What do others in the community think about this as a potential solution?

No comments