Discussion in 'Fedex Freight' started by SwampRatt, Feb 4, 2017.
Someone got owned by our resident "dumb" guy.
I will never have a problem.
Now RC........that's a whole different thing.
I see your vacation from truckingboards did nothing for your ignorant shenanigans. Still bring nothing to the topic at had but emojis and lol's. Maybe it wasn't long enough.
Who said i was on vacation? Maybe you should make another screen name again, everyone liked your other one better anyways.
Not sure how I missed this one but....no, my assumptions have been right all along, and over time the facts have seemed to back up those assumptions.
Do I need to rewind the tape, for the class to see it again? I seem to recall a certain someone being convinced that I didn't work here... An assumption made without knowing all the facts.
It would be off topic, but you know I can show you that one, as well as a list of others. Are you asking for it? Again?
Negative. What you describe is following too close, at an unsafe distance. Tailgating is far more serious, far more dangerous, and falls into the category of aggressive driving. Period.
Final lesson: Let's put you in the lead vehicle, as a victim of “tailgating” (preferably with a passenger or two).
Example 1: Driving along in your personal vehicle, with a passenger or two. You look in your rear view mirror and see nothing but the grill of a truck behind you. You exclaim, "This is guy is tailgating me!" Your passengers look back in terror and agree
Example 2: You see the same Truck 170 feet behind you. Again, you exclaim “this guy is tailgating me!” Your passengers look back, then look at you in disbelief and say, "Man, what are you talking about? Have you lost your mind?"
I rest my case.
I've spent more than enough time on the topic. We all know tailgating when we see it. Enjoy your definition, while we agree to disagree. I can eventually recognize a waste of time when I see it. And the class must move on. Next topic
Now you're assuming I was referring to you...
The Telematics Preshift 2-10-17
According to our preshift on the topic:
We'll have the ELD/camera package between May-June
50% of our fleet currently has it.
The intent and purpose remains educational, but some captured video rises to such a high level that action must be taken.
5 drivers are currently under review.
2 second/3 minute following distance trigger. No mention of the 55 mph minimum. Silence said to be due to not currently being captured.
Clips captured and sent in are 5 seconds in length. Ability to acquire more footage is possible, if deemed to be needed (case by case).
“Safety” reviews submitted video in Harrison.
If driver is to be coached/counseled/interviewed/disciplined, 5 parties will attend.
Service Center Mgr., Managing Director, Road Driver Adviser, Employee Relations (aka H/R), Field Safety, all will attend.
We watched 5 clips showing what was considered egregious driving behavior.
There is quite a lot of info displayed on the video clips. Speed, Tach, Speed limit, % of acceleration, active braking, manual braking. Probably more than I could catch from a single viewing.
It is my understanding, the delay/pause in the roll out is more technical in nature. Ability of the vendor to acquire and provide accurate, consistently reliable info, seems to be the key, rather than any change to the established criteria.
This problem is facing everyone who doesn't already run ELD's. Speedy is still running paper logs because they have yet to find anything satisfactory for their needs that doesn't cost them or their owner/operators an arm and a leg. They are hoping to engage one of the mobile apps like Rand McNally or JJ Keller to keep costs down as they already issue all trucks a mobile device for tracking, communication, dispatch and shipment P&D.
Losing NPME and ODFL, long time transborder customers, to competitors very nearly killed Speedy last year. They've recovered via increased domestic volume, but it has delayed their ability to roll out ELD's. And if I'm right, Dicom (the carrier that swiped NPME) is probably courting Holland too. Speedy's biggest customer.
Things like these, combined with demands on suppliers, is really throttling the rollout of ELD's everywhere. Fortunately, at least for now, Canadian carriers only have to equip trucks that cross the border. Our ELD proposal is at least a year behind.
Speedy is still exclusive to a Holland nobody else gets the freight. Detroit yard is under construction due too many of you guys coming thru at one time.
I noticed that they're clearing the land out back. Does the Dicom trailer I've seen there come from Buffalo?
Night driving is no fun either, we get all the drunks and tired drivers
Yes it could be not 100% sure. We run a lot of freight between points so trailer could've got caught in mix.
Well, if Dicom isn't sending them to Detroit, I can only assume New Penn is passing them along in Buffalo. They don't belong to NPME so I doubt they care what Holland does with them or if they even get them back.
On a side note, I've only ever pulled a Holland trailer out of Detroit once. Either you guys are getting better at giving us our trailers back or I've just had some strange luck. I know Toronto won't load a Detroit on a Speedy any newer than about 2006 if they can help it because otherwise they won't see them for months. Especially the brand new roll door trailers.
I think that's what new penn is doing instead of swinging load. When I was on open board and went thru Detroit and was running empty out of their I would search yard for ours but mainly speedy was the emptys out their so off with a speedy I go. You do see speedy down south like you used to and so someone must have put a stop to it.
I definitely see almost as many of ours as yours there these days. I see about 1/4 of your trucks coming and going with our trailers, but it's usually one for one in and out.
There is a reason for that, Red. Sometimes it is best to listen for a bit, before going on the record with an opinion.
I personally should not be effected by the policy, as Safety is a high priority for me. Actual safety, not just the appearance of safety. In fact SAFETY, is one of the few tools available to keep overly enthusiastic managers from going off the rails.
In my opinion, once the Company has knowledge of (or evidence of) seriously unsafe driving, work practices, ect, they must address it. There is a certain obligation, morally, and also legally, in terms of liability, to allow the behavior to go unchecked. There is also the "brand" to protect, in terms of public image.
There is little reason to debate the change in policy, as the change is almost required, unless there was a contractual restriction that prohibited such a change. We have no restriction, contractual or otherwise...
*My only reservation on the policy, is whether or not a driver initiated hard braking event should qualify as a trigger. It's not a deal breaker, as the video evidence should exonerate the innocent.
Pay close attention to the videos shown. There might be an interesting discussion on the topic.
Yeah like what were the triggers is my question.