bigfoot077
Who's your daddy!
- Credits
- 0
:Off-Topic::Off-Topic::Off-Topic::Off-Topic::Off-Topic:
I think it is great to get a good laugh now and then. Maybe off topic but I am getting a good chuckle out of you guys.
:Off-Topic::Off-Topic::Off-Topic::Off-Topic::Off-Topic:
......................I don't think I want to know what the 'sticky' is.........
Well, it is when I get the big ole manhug and I end up spilling my pepsi! Why, what did you think the sticky is?
Ummm... kool aid??
Um, I don't drink kool aid. To much tainted kool aid around now a days.
JELLO SHOTS?
If we do start to have runs where there will be laydown runs, Con-Way will have bunkhouses.They won't pay for a motel. There would be a mobile office trailer out front in the employee parking lot with cots in it. That would be the cheap way to do it. Oh boy, Breakfast out of the sandwich machine.
too many pages off topic... somebody hit the cut and dump button please. How about a moderator taking about the last 8 pages and starting a man-hug thread?
here are some points to ponder fellas...
the company could not use the 16 hour exemption if all drivers do not return to their home terminals daily. so no layovers on the horizon in my opinion
is it the relatively shorter runs within the central region (America's Midwest) as to why central has always operated with the 60 hour logs? Or, is it the operating model, a company operating 6 days a week as opposed to 7?
why change to a 70 hr log? Is there now an issue with drivers being over hours in Central? I wonder if there are enough statistics within our company to compare crash data between those running 60 vs 70 hours and any difference in the number of fatigue related incidences at the end of the work week? Would the data show drivers to be operating with less attention to safety when their hours of service total is above 60?
Is that what's on tap for tonight or was that last night??
JELLO SHOTS?
too many pages off topic... somebody hit the cut and dump button please. How about a moderator taking about the last 8 pages and starting a man-hug thread?
here are some points to ponder fellas...
the company could not use the 16 hour exemption if all drivers do not return to their home terminals daily. so no layovers on the horizon in my opinion
is it the relatively shorter runs within the central region (America's Midwest) as to why central has always operated with the 60 hour logs? Or, is it the operating model, a company operating 6 days a week as opposed to 7?
why change to a 70 hr log? Is there now an issue with drivers being over hours in Central? I wonder if there are enough statistics within our company to compare crash data between those running 60 vs 70 hours and any difference in the number of fatigue related incidences at the end of the work week? Would the data show drivers to be operating with less attention to safety when their hours of service total is above 60?
Worst case scenario...YRCW doesn't make it.
Then there is the economics of it. Why pay a driver at full scale when you can pay a dockworker to do the same task for seven dollars/hr. less? Pay your premium dollars where they are most needed...to folks that are required to be highly skilled and trained in operating a commercial motor vehicle.
Fatigue issues may not be as bad...nothing like driving for hours one way to an FAC...busting your hump in 90+ degree weather or 9 degree weather moving freight and then have do drive back to the SIC and get there on time to make service.
Of course these are just my opinions...but I can definitely see the implementation of a 70 hour book and lay-downs if things go from push to shove. A big factor and concern would be where you would 'lay-down' :: hole or decency?
Other companies have operated this way for years...and I realize they have been cutting back on this practice using sub-service as an alternative...but that may have to change if the over capacity in the biz disappears.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...
Let the and :Flame-On: begin...
Rat
too many pages off topic... somebody hit the cut and dump button please. How about a moderator taking about the last 8 pages and starting a man-hug thread?
here are some points to ponder fellas...
the company could not use the 16 hour exemption if all drivers do not return to their home terminals daily. so no layovers on the horizon in my opinion
is it the relatively shorter runs within the central region (America's Midwest) as to why central has always operated with the 60 hour logs? Or, is it the operating model, a company operating 6 days a week as opposed to 7?
why change to a 70 hr log? Is there now an issue with drivers being over hours in Central? I wonder if there are enough statistics within our company to compare crash data between those running 60 vs 70 hours and any difference in the number of fatigue related incidences at the end of the work week? Would the data show drivers to be operating with less attention to safety when their hours of service total is above 60?
I agree with you Merdock. We have run 70 hour logs out here in the west for probably 5 years now. One thing though, there for a while they thought of switching us back to the 60 hour log. So I don't know for the life of me who is making decisions and how they are making them. We are not doing more layovers here. Occasionally because of a linehaul mess up we will have a layover or two. Not regular thing out here.
I just don't understand some decisions, since we are supposed to be all in one now, why is it we still are doing things differently. Now, maybe they want everyone to be on a 70 hour log but that don't explain why they were talking about us going back on 60. I don't run this company but sometimes they make decisions here without really thinking about what they are doing. :annoyed:
You nailed it Rat but I don't think that it will be as bad as you think. We and other companies are starting to get their companies back into position for the impending YRC failure. Have you seen YRC stock lately? It has doubled in price, from $1.50 to over $3.00. Now I know that 3 bucks isn't much but they are on the up swing.
They may be worried that they Might make it
Then the labor cost should be less also
Conway has always been a company of reaction instead of proactive. If they are looking ahead to what might happen, it is the first time. Years ago when Milne Freight Lines went out they weren't prepared for the influx of freight. When CF went away, again we were so hammered and had freight sitting in the parking lot because we had no more dock space. When UPS went on strike, we had an influx of freight and packages. One thing they did do was cut of the amount of freight we picked up from new customers to make sure they had capacity for our regular customers. That was nice and profound to see.
Prepare for the worse and hope for the best.
I thought why you guys ran a 70 hour log was that your reships are more spread out down south and out west then they are in central
ELIMINATE EMPTY MILES, ELIMINATE EMPTY MILES. I remember hearing this a lot in the videos. This is what I don't understand about their thinking. SC X cuts a run, They have 4 trailers going to the reship, 6 trailers coming back. The reship will create 4 vias to cover the original 2 trailers. Thus creating 4 times the empty miles compared to the original empty miles if they were to send someone to the reship from SC X.
I have also seen pure trailers sent 150 miles out of the way to eliminate empty miles. Then ending up creating 2 or 3 vias to cover that trailer because the receiving terminal went over at the reship.
Wouldn't it make more sense to send the amount of drivers to the reship to cover the freight? Eliminate the need to cram and jam the freight into a trailer and eliminate damages and claims? Seems like they are spending more money and accomplishing less. Am I thinking too clearly?