Prune Picker
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 45
Is ABF thinking about installing driver facing cameras?
ABF | Driver facing cameras
- Thread starter Prune Picker
- Start date
Bloodweiser
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 65
Already in progress. Next time your sitting in your truck smile at the handheld
Trucker 206
TB Veteran
- Credits
- 0
Leave the handheld on the dash (or floor) face down. Problem solved. Or, put some dark tape over those little ‘lenses’ up near the top front of the device. Again...problem solved.Already in progress. Next time your sitting in your truck smile at the handheld
if ABF trucks have a forward facing camera then the driver facing cameras will be in your trucks in the near future. Retrofitting the driver facing camera is something that an ABF mechanic shop can do. Saia shops installed the retrofitted cameras. Don't worry, the cameras are there to help protect the driver. So says the Safety Department and then the write ups, suspensions, and termination policies are put in place. You can forget about union contract protections. You want the pay increase, the company wants the cameras and you will sign the contract. How bad can it be? You'll find out.
We won't agree with driver facing cameras.We've already been through this at YRC.
Trucker 206
TB Veteran
- Credits
- 0
Good. Totally unnecessary IMO.
And you didn't agree with all those concessions either and who won that battle and who continues to win that battle. It's all about the money and, according to you guys, ABF has it but doesn't want to share. You may be able to delay it but your going to have to give up something. You know that you are not going to strike and the company knows it as well.
Prune Picker
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 45
Saia drivers were told that they would not have driver facing cameras and about 5 months later they had them.
runawaytrain
Wear their scorn with pride.
- Credits
- 10
IMO ArcBest won’t push for cameras. They cost millions and they wouldn’t want to spend that kind of money. They have way to many other pressing issues to deal with. It’s a moot point and I wouldn’t concern myself with it.
They really don't need cameras, their drivers don't blow stop signs, unlike some drivers we know.
The concessions were agreed to by the majority of employees at ABF, but don't let facts get in the way of your argument.
And ABF wasn't twisting your arm either, were they? I guess the majority thought that you had too much vacation, were paid too much, and willingly and with a smile gave up those concessions. Don't let reality get in the way of your argument.
ouch, that left a mark.
Like who? I would think that ALL of the truck drivers (Except me, of course) would have some type of situation where 100% of the traffic code wasn't followed...of course with the Aye Bee Ffuh trucks turned down, you can still speed in a 25-35 speed limit posted?
Ask Train, I'm sure he'll let you know.
canaryinthemine
Retirement....The Job I Was Born To Have!
- Credits
- 0
The problem with driver-facing cameras is a "liability vs. privacy" issue. Union carriers have the resources and the ability to grieve this issue,....even if it is ratified in the contract.
The company,.....contractually,.....has to state these cameras aren't being used for "disciplinary" purposes. Once stated,........the interpretation of "disciplinary" use becomes the perview of the grievance machinery,....subject to the how each aggrieved person perceived he is "disciplined" unfairly and in violation of the contract.
This could become a nightmare,......and any company that is using the cameras for the "stated" use,......has to look at statistics as to whether the driver-facing cameras limited the company liability AND was COST-EFFECTIVE in reducing accidents.
If there is no COST-SAVING in mounting these cameras,........and they are ostensibly used to discipline and "build cases" against drivers........no matter WHAT their stated purpose was,............then any carrier with access to grievance machinery would be opening up a major ligitatory "can'o'worms" in regards to individual drivers' rights to an expectation of privacy,...........similar to what any employee can expect in the company-provided bathroom.
I don't see ABF wanting to be the leader in major national litigation concerning employee right to privacy.........
I also don't see very many cameras in manager offices, dispatch windows, CEO executive offices, and corporate boardrooms. Of course,......we all know nothing shady or illegal goes on there............
In the corporate eyes,.....only the lowly working person is capable of moral dysfunction,...........When you get hired into management,....they hand you a shiny new set of unsullied morals and high standards............
Any UPS guys want to comment on that?
The company,.....contractually,.....has to state these cameras aren't being used for "disciplinary" purposes. Once stated,........the interpretation of "disciplinary" use becomes the perview of the grievance machinery,....subject to the how each aggrieved person perceived he is "disciplined" unfairly and in violation of the contract.
This could become a nightmare,......and any company that is using the cameras for the "stated" use,......has to look at statistics as to whether the driver-facing cameras limited the company liability AND was COST-EFFECTIVE in reducing accidents.
If there is no COST-SAVING in mounting these cameras,........and they are ostensibly used to discipline and "build cases" against drivers........no matter WHAT their stated purpose was,............then any carrier with access to grievance machinery would be opening up a major ligitatory "can'o'worms" in regards to individual drivers' rights to an expectation of privacy,...........similar to what any employee can expect in the company-provided bathroom.
I don't see ABF wanting to be the leader in major national litigation concerning employee right to privacy.........
I also don't see very many cameras in manager offices, dispatch windows, CEO executive offices, and corporate boardrooms. Of course,......we all know nothing shady or illegal goes on there............
In the corporate eyes,.....only the lowly working person is capable of moral dysfunction,...........When you get hired into management,....they hand you a shiny new set of unsullied morals and high standards............
Any UPS guys want to comment on that?
canaryinthemine
Retirement....The Job I Was Born To Have!
- Credits
- 0
All that above being said,............I can see a MUCH BETTER idea ,..........in using body cameras,....similar to what the police have,.........for when the driver is performing private home and inside delivery services...................
And,......right now,......every corporate manager just went into "Sargeant Schultz" mode............."Don't want to see,.....Don't want to know,....Don't want to hear......."
And,......right now,......every corporate manager just went into "Sargeant Schultz" mode............."Don't want to see,.....Don't want to know,....Don't want to hear......."
Will you get a letter for picking your nose ? of course, you'd have to take your hands off the steering wheel? and will some manager with low morals hide a camera in the ladies room? or men's, depending on the gender that is "identified with" that day?
Well....not actually smiling, lots of frowning, and I hate to hear grown men whine, but I did some myself....even ole' company man TurnCoat got a little pissed over that. I was told some of the locals run the business agents out of the union halls in places when they told them it was the best they could get, however, to start with, the company wanted a 15% pay cut, a weeks vacation reduced, 50% off pension contributions, and lower H&W which would have meant higher co-pays at the Dr.'s office/hospital/dentist/optometrist. So, we wound up with just a black eye and dodged the nosebleed. Can you imagine being a union boss and walking in to deliver that news....in Chicago....New Jersey.....Cleveland? I'm sure he don't go alone.
