1) Safety
The electronic logging device mandate does nothing to promote safety; rather, ELDs merely record movement of the vehicle. The overwhelming safety issue has to do with the hours of service, which in present form force the driver to drive in unsafe situations, such as when they are tired or in rush-hour traffic. Flexibility in the hours of service is what will address the safety issue and will also help to reduce the overwhelming parking-shortage issue now being seen throughout the industry. The mandate does nothing to address these issues. Recording the vehicle’s movement is to enforce the hours of service, which in itself suggests that there is a safety issue, but the mandate does nothing to alleviate the problem. Rather, it adds to it by adding stress to the driver with the time consumed learning new technology, and at times correcting faulty technology, which all takes away from their on-duty hours. Those hours either have to be made up or reduce productivity, which equates to loss of revenue.
2) Burdens
The associated costs of fitting these units to older trucks — along with the cost of the units themselves and with the monthly subscriptions most come with — brings a financial burden that can not be made up by the smaller carriers, many of whom depend on the spot market for their livelihood. Deregulation as regards the rating system now in place, along with brokerages operating unchecked, is suppressing the carrier’s ability to turn a reasonable profit. While the operating costs continually rise, the rates are continually being suppressed, which keeps the pressure on to keep the company in profitability.
Then there comes the burden of learning the new technology. Most of the old-school drivers who have proven their ability to operate safely over the years are now being subjected to this form of prejudice, that being the one-size-fits-all mentality. These drivers not only don’t want this, but also in reality by their action and safe record over the years don’t need to be treated as if they are rookie drivers. These are the drivers who are well established and the ones buying the newer trucks to add comfort and dependability to their operation. The mandate is adding unnecessary stress to the seasoned driver, who is considering leaving the industry due to this unnecessary action. What is being accomplished by the mandate is counterproductive, as it is taking the safest drivers off the road. Once again, the mandate does nothing to promote safety.
3) Economics
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that big money is being propagated under the disguise of safety. The forced sales of these units will go into the billions, then add the monthly subscription rates and one can see what this is all about. Safety has absolutely nothing to do with it. On the other hand, many independent truckers are considering quitting the industry over this. Losses to the government will include $550 per truck in Heavy Highway Use tax, along with the UCR fees (which accomplish nothing) and fuel taxes. That’s only the beginning. Once again, people will be put out of work, which constitutes a loss of income tax and sales tax revenues. Have we learned nothing from the recession of 2008, in which so many people lost their homes? This mandate is doing much the same thing; only this time it affects the trucking industry as opposed to the mortgage industry. However the effects will be just as far-reaching when goods aren’t being delivered in a timely fashion.
4) Our position
We are a very small company now of five trucks. Prior to this mandate being introduced, there were 4. Two 1999 models, one 2000 and one 2001. The third 1999 was purchased under the threat of the mandate. All these trucks are well maintained and all have gone through in-frame overhauls. All the ABS systems are kept in working order as well. We have invested a lot of money and time into the two trucks that will fall under the mandate — the 2000 and 2001. The mandate will render these trucks useless, as they are some 17 years old, and although they are in good working order, no one will buy them due to the mandate.
These two trucks represent less than half of our small fleet, and under the mandate, we will be losing the drivers for them, as these seasoned drivers will have no part of ELDs. Our only choice to recover the losses caused by this mandate will be to part-out two perfectly good trucks and put two families out of income. The other alternative is to invest even more money into them with little to no chance of recovering the investment, as it will be nearly impossible to attract drivers to these trucks.
