Images and Interests

So, It's a New Year and I am perusing all of the pending legislation, proposed rule changes, upcoming things within our industry that are probably going to be affecting us soon, when I come across this request to the FMCSA on behalf of CRST. They are requesting an exemption from the FMCSA that would allow a ‘PERMITTED’ driver to drive a commercial vehicle without the requirement of having an actual CDL holder riding along in the jump seat. It would allow CRST to operate trucks with a PERMITTED driver in team operations?!?
I am floored, to say the least. What??? I reread it, yep, that is EXACTLY what it says, not only that, but, as I investigate further, I come across a Landline magazine online article in which I discover CRST is following a lead that CR England started last year (actually England requested the exemption in late 2014 and it was granted in 2015).
NO WAY! I’m thinking that with all the pressure they (in Washington) are putting on us (the entire trucking community) to increase safety, to increase training, to modify hours of service until they're almost unworkable, to monitor our every movement, to monitor our every stopped second, to monitor our speed, to control each and every aspect of each and every day of our life whether on duty or off, to take control of our equipment by forcing installation of systems and alarms that actually take over the operation of said equipment when ‘it’ feels the need, by micro managing our industry to its literal death, there's NO WAY they could even be considering such a request, right?!? WRONG.
Not only am I wrong, but also I somehow didn't see it last year when it was up for comment when CR England requested their exemption. And that it was GRANTED!
At present, all drivers who hold a current commercial drivers PERMIT are allowed to drive a big truck ONLY while a under the direct supervision of a qualified CDL holder which means that the inexperienced driver must have the wisdom and watchfulness of an experienced driver overseeing his/her every move. I see no problem with that, in fact, that topic, in and of itself has been the basis of many discussions within the industry as to how long a period should be required before turning a trainee loose. Even after obtaining their CDL from the governing agency in their home states, many have discussed requiring a training period that would involve a CDL holders constant oversight for a period of time before allowing the new driver to run alone, without being watched constantly.
Call me crazy, but I can see no good out of allowing such an exemption as this. CRST has requested the exemption based on several reasons, all of them financial. They said that after graduation from their truck driving school the students are sent home to get their CDLs, getting them home means putting them on CRST trucks as passengers on scheduled runs, which can take some time. This means the new drivers can forget (?) how to drive in the time it took to get home, they weren’t able to practice driving even though they had passed the skills tests at school, that because of all the potential delays, they may lose them altogether.
They (CRST) go on to state how it would benefit them (CRST) from the exemption because, as of now, the company has increased costs when getting a student home following school if they use public forms of transportation, or, when putting them with a driver on one of their company trucks it “doubles their cost for half the productivity.” Also, they said, CRST risks further financial loss as they would “undoubtedly lose control of some CLP holders once they returned home and obtained their CDL – as they may find employment elsewhere” upon getting home and getting their CDLs.
I'm sorry, personally I think this is just a very bad idea, on so many levels, maybe it's just my 40 years of driving experience, maybe it's my 4 million safe miles, I don't know but I wish, I PRAY that these people would listen, for once to experience and wisdom, heck, common sense!
There is a period of time for comments from all of us regarding these exemption requests, unfortunately the final date for this one if Feb.4, but, if you do see this in time, and you would like to submit your comments regarding CRST’s requested exemption you can go to regulations.gov docket number FMCSA-2015-0480. I know my comments will be there, I hope yours will be too!
Til next month, y'all stay safe out there and God Bless!