Swift To Remove Driver Facing Cameras

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the whole purpose of having a driver facing camera was to protect the company from a negligent driver, or to protect a driver from false claims of reckless driving that could ultimately lead to termination of employment or even jail time.

You're exactly right. And I've gotta say I'm always amazed at how many truckers get all upset over this simple issue. We're all on camera most of our lives, everywhere we go, and the overwhelming majority of Americans spend their entire workday on camera and they're not crying about it. They accept it because they understand the need for it.

But hey, you could hand a trucker a bag of gold and he'd complain it was too heavy. That's just what most truckers do best.....complain.

Let's now see how many distracted driving accidents will occur now. I didn't mind the camera because it is an accountability tool. It got me to stop looking at my cell phone like I used to in the past.

Just came over my Qualcomm that drivers may now cover the inward facing camera if they want to. I'm in agreement with the minority. I'd rather have it on for my protection. I see so many commercial drivers texting and driving, and they're usually all over the road. I'll pass. I couldn't live with myself if I killed a bunch of people because of texting and driving.

Errol's gonna get fat with all the oreo's he can eat now.

Just came over my Qualcomm that drivers may now cover the inward facing camera if they want to. I'm in agreement with the minority. I'd rather have it on for my protection. I see so many commercial drivers texting and driving, and they're usually all over the road. I'll pass. I couldn't live with myself if I killed a bunch of people because of texting and driving.

Not so sure you are the minority. I feel exactly how you do...

The actual post on Swift's online driver portal:

"Our Drivers spoke and we listened!

Tomorrow, we are remotely turning off the recording function of DriveCam inward-facing cameras in all Swift trucks. We have thoughtfully considered our Driver feedback and know there is constant discontent with the capture of in-cab video.

However, we also know that the DriveCam outward-facing event recorders have been instrumental in providing Swift with significant cost savings and coaching opportunities, by serving as an objective witness in significant events. For those reasons, the outward-facing event capture will remain intact.

Effective tomorrow, Drivers may obscure the inward-facing lens of their DriveCam device – as long as they do not harm the lens or unit in any way. The new DriveCam Driver Policy is now posted on all portals and may be requested by e-mailing [removed]. All questions should also be sent to [removed].

Feedback is a gift and we’re thankful to be able to act on ways to deliver a better life to our Drivers and Employees.

Thank you."

...and my response:

"It looks like I'm in the minority here, but I appreciated having the driver facing camera. We could cover it when we were off duty or in the sleeper berth without repercussions, so there was no "invasion of privacy." As far as the camera recording me while driving, there is nothing private about driving an 80,000 lb machine down the same public roadways my wife uses to drive herself to work. What about the hours of appalling footage Swift has captured of drivers using their cellphones while driving and falling asleep at the wheel? Isn't that reason enough to keep the inward-facing cameras? I know two drivers who were caught (by the inward facing camera) using their cellphones while driving. One corrected his behavior and is now a safer driver. The other became a lease-op, where he is likely continuing his unsafe habits. While I was in training, my own mentor texted while driving multiple times but there was no driver facing camera to prove it. In his case, nothing will be investigated until it's too late and the damage is done.

Despite what it seems the majority of drivers here seem to think, driver facing cameras are not an invasion of privacy (if turned off while the driver is off duty or in the sleeper), and this is a step in the wrong direction."

Very disappointed with this decision. Thanks Swift: Best in Crash.

Just came over my Qualcomm that drivers may now cover the inward facing camera if they want to. I'm in agreement with the minority. I'd rather have it on for my protection. I see so many commercial drivers texting and driving, and they're usually all over the road. I'll pass. I couldn't live with myself if I killed a bunch of people because of texting and driving.

Not so sure you are the minority. I feel exactly how you do...

I agree. You can not possibly argue that removing these cameras is going to promote better safety. It certainly will not. I'd love to hear Swift talk publicly about the decision. Prime also.

Cuz I'm sharing the road with everyone just the same and I've seen all of the same things you guys have - truckers texting while driving, falling asleep at the wheel, watching movies on their laptop, taking pictures with their camera, a burger in one hand and a drink in the other, reading the map while it's laying over the steering wheel, etc. I've seen it all a million times. I know for a fact this stuff is going on all the time. Right now, in fact.

And these are the same guys crying for their "privacy". Your privacy? From the boss? He's paying you. You're driving his truck. He's financially responsible if you screw up. You're on public highways surrounded by innocent people. That makes no sense.

It all makes no sense to me at all. This seems on the surface to be one of those business decisions where they are knowingly making the highways more dangerous in the name of recruiting more drivers. If that's not what this is then I'd love to hear an explanation from these companies.

If anyone knows of any articles or news footage where company representatives have spoken publicly about removing these cameras, or for choosing not to use them, please put a link to it here. I'd love to learn more about what's going on.

Hey all.

I used to post here until I got banned . . . because I persisted in making logical and coherent arguments . . . that exposed the tortured logic and general speciousness of their arguments . . .

Score: Complaining drivers and discerning recruits 1, Company “yes” men and other dumbasses 0

Dan N., I don't really care either way about the camera thing, and I'm pretty sure I didn't take part in the original thread, but I would like to offer some words of advice for making effective arguments.

First, when making actual "logical and coherent arguments," or even when summarily characterizing your past "logical and coherent arguments" that exposed the "tortured logic and general speciousness" of your opponents' arguments, it is advisable to demonstrate that by avoiding specious arguments yourself.

Insults and ad hominem attacks are rightly considered specious by the vast majority of people, and the only logic demonstrated above is "told ya so!"

Second, don't do that if you want to be taken seriously.