Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
In relation to the focus group meetings, was the question of drivers properly dropping trailers at the correct height addressed by chance?Focus Group Portion:
Since road and city were segregated, for obvious reasons, I can only share the city side of the discussion, although I heard that the road guys did bring up the need to bring city more in line with road, compensation wise.
As you might expect I brought up everything I could get in. Notes taken, and discussed. I won't say who brought up what, and I really didn't take many notes on this portion, since the purpose and intent (I think) was for Corporate to listen to us.
Lots of general philosophy things were discussed, general practices, what should be common sense etc. Much agreement (or at least appearance of agreement) from the Operations and H/R staff conducting this portion.
It was brought up that most rules and procedures for city should mirror road rules, when possible. Bids and how they are honored, Trucks, etc all mentioned.
On the issue of the one pay structure/benefit that is different for city, while more fair for road (based on annual earnings), The vacation benefit and the fact that is should be the same for all drivers, was mentioned.It was said to have been, and IS being considered. At this time, the cost associated with that improvement (8+mil), has been decided would be better spent placing all budgeted gains into the wages.
I seem to recall 8.6 mil was the quoted cost of such an enhancement. Not an unreasonable amount to spend on something that is “the right thing to do”.
Based on 2014 annual numbers, a cost of 8.6 million would be less than .15% (.00149). Between 1 and 2 tenths of 1 percent of the total budget. Pretty small percentage in the grand scheme of things, IMHO
Onto the wage issue. It was also noted that since all gains are slated to go to wages (which I do support), the distribution method will be different this time around. It is said that rather than apply increases across the board, they will be weighted toward the more veteran end of the pay ladder. This makes good sense since our entry level pay is already more than competitive, and would apply to applicants that don't even work here... Yet.
I know their answer to this problem WAS to eliminate the dump valves on the tractors but this one fix actually created atleast five more problems!!! (I say "was" because they've now went back to ordering trucks with dump valves again while retrofitting the ones we got without them) IMHO, I feel the problem lies with drivers not knowing the proper way to drop a trailer. I was taught that when you back under a trailer, the landing gear should lift slightly off the ground...in order for this to happen, common sense tells us that when dropping a trailer the landing gear should be left slightly off the ground!!
I understand that there's no "industry standard" related to the 5th wheel ride height and that height is also somewhat effected by the amount of weight on the trailer, but most of us have been driving long enough that we shouldn't have to spend ten minutes cranking the landing gear because the previous driver dropped a trailer a foot above the next driver's 5th wheel!!
We all know that the Volvo's have the lowest ride height while the KW T-600's have the highest.
If you drive a KW T-600 and the trailer has some weight, PLEASE leave the landing gear atleast three inches off the ground, then dump the bags before pulling out....if the trailer is empty, PLEASE leave the landing gear four-five inches off the ground, it'll make hooking a lot easier for everyone else!!!
For the rest of our trucks, leaving the landing gear one-two inches off the ground when dropping should be suffencient, there's no need to roll the landing gear all the way to the ground!!