Profile For Robert B. (The Dragon) yes, I breathe fire and other sideshow tricks

Clean trucks are great (for about 24 hours that it stays clean).

Only a couple hours this time but she was overdue. I hate having a dirty truck.

Ok so that was bizarre.

The average load pays 5k gross, so even deadhead you'd be making $2500 gross each way. It's definitely nicer to have a backhaul but even without one, it pays well.

One thing I forgot to mention, we're on percentage which works out to the drivers benefit big time on those runs when you see what they're charging per mile. An otr load is getting between $5-$7 a mile and our heavy haul ranges $9 and up depending on the load.

It depends. We haul quite a bit for the mines up there and will take equipment, supplies, parts etc up and if they have a load of parts or machines for repair, that's what comes back. Otherwise, they'll bounce the driver back empty but even empty, the load more than pays for the trip.

Kivi brothers out of Duluth Minnesota. We run roughly 8-10 loads a month up to Fairbanks and Anchorage and sometimes more during the summer months. This time of year, they generally only send the more experienced drivers up.

Hey guys. I am new here. Does this apply for celadon Canada? I was just going to join them in February now I am concerned. I liked the recruiter talk very much

It will effect Hyndman as well as Jaguar, their Mexico fleet.

Someone just created a Facebook page specifically to help Celadon drivers find new positions.

What happens to all those drivers?

They'll wind up finding a driving position somewhere else. Hirschbach has already offered free bus tickets to drivers who get stranded, whether they apply with them or not.

When Steve Russell passed, the upper management went crazy and it led to the SEC investigation and fines. They never really recovered and the mismanagement continued. It's a shame too because I met Mr Russell on several occasions when I worked for freightliner and he truly was a great individual.

I don't anymore but still have friends who do and it's very true. They're being told to fill their tanks so they can get home next week. FedEx stopped booking loads with them over fears of stranded trailers and they've already contacted customers making them aware of the stopped service.

All hail greed and mismanagement.

I don't see many O/O pulling Amazon much because of their program and rates. I've seen more Knight, JB Hunt and US Express hooked to them lately.

See, I stopped as you asked. Then I asked for legitimate information and you respond by antagonizing. I offered up information coming from states who have conducted expert studies and made changes accordingly but yet still antagonizing. I asked for an actual study, a link to support their claim and nothing but an opinion.

Report

So it's an opinion with no statistics to back it up. Gotcha. I'm not in disagreement with the idea of driving responsibly. Heck, I rarely run over 67-68 on the big open stretches. My opposition is and has consistently been forcing a mandate with no actual data to prove a claim. The only real data out there shows that what they're trying to force is a very bad idea and completely contradicts their claim of safety improvements.

You asked and I stopped, no need to continue to badger me as you often do to anyone who opposes you. Now, can you please point me in the direction of the studies that support the push for this bill? Actual, studies and numbers since you're a numbers guy and not just personal or emotional opinion.

I'll also retract my statements in regards to the ATA. One report I read stated that they supported it and were behind it. I just read another where they're actually slamming the proposition because there is NO research to back it. The DOT has delayed it a dozen times since it was initially proposed in 2011 due to not having ANY research or studies to back the claims of the groups pushing it.

I did stop all that Brett. I went to one specific question which nobody wants to answer and has been posed by not only myself. Besides, since when is it up to opposition to prove the counter point? Several experts in a dozen states have already proven the danger of split speed limits but that's been ignored and the group pushing the legislation has provided no reports or statistics to back their claim.

I'll still go back to my original point, which goes back to Rick's original statement. They're bypassing the very organization who is responsible for maintaining safety standards in the industry. They're doing so in regards to an accident where speed was never mentioned and that push came from a non profit. All other things aside, where are their findings to prove their claim of additional safety and why are they taking another route to achieve what they couldn't get passed 2 years ago?

I wholeheartedly agree that it should be regulated state by state rather than a federal mandate placing a restriction on trucks themselves. In regards to Fullers statement, I'd love to know just where he came up with his 450-500 mile legal limit per day. If that's true, then maybe there should be a full audit of his driver's because I'm betting they incur a massive amount of fines. I think the simple argument that it's a state by state issue is more than valid in reference to your not seeing one being made given that there are so many states who have done their own research and made changes accordingly. It's much easier for a state to make changes based on their own findings vs a federal change.

Agreed Rick. My intent wasn't to start a cat fight. My question is specifically to motive and the fact of how they're pursuing it. Indiana is one of the 12 states currently looking to repeal split speed limits. A local radio host interviewed an individual with state DOT a few months ago on his program and that individual pointed to the fact that the majority of accidents are not caused by commercial drivers but rather the motoring public being impatient with forced slower vehicles and making rash decisions causing accidents. They reviewed models showing that a consistent flow of traffic reduced a significant amount of those types of accidents and pointed to the fact that the public needed to be less distracted and more patient but punishing the safer group of drivers wasn't the correct solution. Their decision found that the consistent flow would lead to safer motorways. Indiana isn't the only state to come to this same conclusion which has me asking, where are the studies the ATA is using which contradicts multiple states findings and why isn't that information being processed through the proper channels?