I Might Have To Slip Someone A Note About This

 

I saw this comic framed on the wall of a restaurant we recently dined at.

This is so me.  

I wouldn't say anything to the waiter, but I'd be so disturbed by the misspellings that it would bother me throughout my entire meal.  I'd want to say something but I know that if that menu is being placed in front of me, it's been in front of the eyes of hundreds of people before me, and the restaurant owners or managers are probably well aware of the mistake, and no one has bothered to correct it. Are they really going to care what I think?

Here are a few other incidents where spelling made my head explode:  this one and this one.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2024: Olive You
2023: Where The Turia River Meets The Mediterranean Sea
2022: A Hail Mary, Lucky Horseshoes, And Some Really Good Trip Planning Are All That's Needed
2021: Beautiful Freak Of Nature
2020: Sorry, no post on this day.
2019: Ring The Bell For Tips
2018: Snacks & Bar
2017: So This Happened Today
2016: Agrarian
2015: Tied Off
2014: Seek And Ye Shall Find
2013: Frantically Trying To Get Back To Indonesia
2012: I’d Like Some Snow For Dessert
2011: Getting A Little Carried Away
2010: On A Need To Know Basis
2009: Something Has Gone Terribly Wrong
2008: Flying Into The Sun
2007: Riding The Rails
2006: Keeping Me Quiet With A Chocolate Snap
2005: Sorry, no post on this day. The blog didn’t start until May 2005!

Maybe None Of Us Should Have Pizza

It's happening again.  Everyone in the country is having that same conversation again.  Everyone is going on about the most recent "deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history".  It's like these assholes keep trying to one-up each other by killing more people than the last guy did.  The conversation consists of the same 'ol same 'ol - "How do we make sense of what happened in Las Vegas?" and "How can we prevent something like this from happening again?"

Well, let's take a look at the reading material stationed at the door of one of the TA truck stops we recently stopped at:

Guns & Ammo

The Complete Book of Guns

Black Guns

American Survival Guide (ironic)

Concealed Carry

Ballistic

and, People Magazine.  I suppose that's for those lily-livered Hollywood liberal types who don't believe in The Constitution. 

Americans have an insane obsession with guns.  They look at owning one as some hallmark of freedom, of patriotism.  They claim they're needed for protection.  Protection from what?  Other nutjob gun owners, it seems.  They take the "right to bear arms" amendment psychotically far.  They refuse to believe an amendment written for muskets in 1791 should still be unilaterally applied to gun ownership today.  

Well, ICYMI (In Case You Missed It), yesterday 59 people were killed and over 500 more were injured in a mass shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada.

First, let me say - what the everloving fuck is going on in this country??  It makes me sick.  And pissed.

FIFTY-NINE people are dead.  People, who as Ed said, were "...innocent people doing what Americans do.  Pursuing happiness by going to a concert with their family and friends."

And why are they gone?  Gone.  Dead.  NEVER EVER COMING BACK.

Why?

Because some asshole was allowed to own a gun.  Well, several guns.  Lots of guns.  And then he transported them to a place where thousands of people congregate and hundreds more stream into the streets, twenty-four hours a day.  He used them to kill 59 innocent people and injure hundreds more.

After the shooting, like clockwork, the "thoughts and prayers" started coming.  As they always do.  They're useless.  Useless before.  Useless during.  Useless after.  The politicians sending out thoughts and prayers are the WORST.  Especially the Christian ones who espouse to be like Christ yet vote against families and children and those less fortunate.  Especially ones like Trump, who couldn't quote a scripture to save his own life, let alone anyone else's.  And especially the ones beholden to the NRA. 

The NRA spent more than $30 million dollars on last year's presidential campaign in an effort to help elect Trump.  They used $19.7 million to oppose Hillary Clinton and $10.6 million to support Donald Trump.

In fact, the NRA donates overwhelmingly to the Republican party. They have the balls of more politicians than one can count squeezed in their hot little gun-toting hands.  Last year alone, they spent $54.4 million, almost all of it going to Republicans.  People don't want to make any assumptions about what that means, but I'm pretty sure it means whoever is squeezing your balls, will be the one who gets what they want.  And in following the money, you'll discover that in the 2016 election, the NRA spent $52.6 million on the Republicans to get what they wanted.  The Democrats only got $265.  265 Dollars, not millions.  No, that's not a typo.  The NRA knows who their audience is.

But let's get back to the thoughts and prayers.  Surprisingly, the strategy of praying to God is not stopping the mass shootings.  Does anyone really believe it does?

If the killing of 20 children under the age of seven didn't change anything about the gun laws in this country, nothing will.  I guess some people in this country - politicians and others - are just okay with kids dying.  Being gunned down in their classroom ten days before Christmas.  Presents already bought, Christmas outfits ready for church or a trip to grandma's house, joy wafting through the December air.  They're okay with dead kids who missed all of that.  If that didn't change anything, this won't either.  And don't even get me started on how all the news anchors get all misty-eyed and put on their caring voices to interview survivors at the scene.  They have to fill airtime, you know.

I'm so disgusted by all of this.  Honestly, I believe all guns need to be banned.  You don't need a gun. Plenty of countries have productive, prosperous, happy citizens living mass-murder-free existences.  Because they don't allow citizens to own guns.  This article states, "In a typical year, over 13,000 Americans will be killed by guns. To put that into perspective, that is six times more than the total number of American troops killed in Afghanistan over the last 16 years. America’s gun homicide rate is 25 times the average of other developed countries. There is now, typically, one mass shooting per day in the United States. Over the course of the year, 45 of those will be school shootings."  A mass shooting is defined as a shooting where "four or more people are killed".

Dave King, a guy on Twitter, said,

i mean i fucking love pizza but if pizza violently killed 30,000 people a year i'd be like okay maybe none of us should have pizza

— Dave King (@DaveKingThing) October 3, 2017

It's that old school adage about how one kid ruins it for the whole class.  Well these fuckers killing people have ruined it for the whole class.  And I'm okay with giving up pizza.

Congress, and specifically the Republicans, need to take those balls out of the NRA's grip and ACT like they've actually got a pair.  Instead of signing bills into law that make it easier for people with mental illness to get guns, they should be signing bills into law that make it impossible for people to possess guns.  Of any kind.  Sorry, gun enthusiasts.  Your asshole friends ruined it for you.  Take your obsession to a gun range.  Play violent video games.  Rent The Deer Hunter if watching a stag die a violent death gives you a woodie.  You've really got to take one for the team on this.

This just cannot keep happening.  We cannot be worried about going to outdoor concerts, and movies, and grocery stores.  How is that freedom?

I long for the days when I could flip off the guy who cut me off in traffic without worrying about being shot for it.

That would make America great again.



~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2016: Ed Talks Meat With Elvis
2015: Slickrocks, Domes, Bowls, Fins, And Things
2014: Have Another Piece Of Cake
2013: I Was Searching For Leather Goods And Found Something To Dream About
2012: Tomatoes Under Glass
2011: The Best Seat In The House
2010: Countdown To Pisa
2009: Eddie Goes Waaaay South Friday
2008: Port Of Long Beach
2007: Layers Of History
2006: Would I Be Cheesy If I Said I Wanted To Drive THIS Rig??
2005: Paper Glow

The Image Character Of Poop

Emoji - those little icons on your phone - originated in Japan.  Today, most people couldn't imagine sending a text message without them.  

In Japanese, "E" means image and "Moji" means character.  Image Character.  Some of them are really cute, and many are sent to replace complete sentences.  My friends and I even have emoji with secret meaning.  All I have to do is send one little cartoonish icon and a complete conversation has been had.

I love getting emoji in a text or an email. They're fun. Creative. Silly. There are emoji I wish existed, ones I never use, and ones I don't even understand.  Like the poop emoji.  

Why??  Why do you need to send a pile of shit to someone?

Well, there's actually a little history on how the poop emoji came to be.

I understand there are situations where it fits - a shitty day, feeling shitty, your boss who's acting like a shit - but I'm still not entirely sold on it.  The visual of a pile of poo?  Not my thing.

But what's even more perplexing than using the poop emoji in a text or email, is the person who'd buy a poop balloon.  Sure, it makes a perfect gag gift, but I'm guessing the poop balloons that flank the checkout lines at Walmart aren't being purchased so much for gag gifts as they are by parents for their kids who are begging for them.  Kids always think poop is funny.

That said, I don't care how much my kid screamed, I would not be buying them a balloon shaped like a pile of shit.



~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2015: Buckeye Affluence
2014: Snaking Through Idaho
2013: Fun Funky Freaky Friday The 13th
2012: Scooting Around Town
2011: Eureka! Sand For The Golden State
2010: Eddie Lounging In Black And White
2009: Not Quick Enough For A Sunset
2008: We’ve Got Onions, Cream Cheese, And Choppers!
2007: Just Steps Away From The River
2006: The Anything But Itty Bitty Co-Op City
2005: What The Hell Are You Looking At? 

Proof They Have All The Training They Need

June 6, 2014: According to Dalhart, TX police reports, the C.R. England driver failed to control his speed, lost control of the vehicle, ran off the road, and ran straight into the grain bin.

Because I'm an owner-operator and not being force-dispatched anywhere, I have a lot of time to sit around and surf the internet.  And since I got a little involved with this C.R. England thing a few weeks ago, I decided to dedicate some of my free time to writing another post about it. It's just sorta bugging me.

I'm no Erin Brockovich - although Julia Roberts should feel free to play me in the movie version should that happen - but I am an information hound.  I can't read an article, blog post, magazine, book, or sometimes even a sentence without stopping mid-stream to Google something I don't know or want more information on. And this C.R. England exemption had me Googling.  

For a company that professes dedication to good training and safety, I don't see how they think their exemption request reinforces that dedication.  And I still can't get over the fact that the FMCSA actually granted them the exemption.  What's the point of having rules if you're just going to allow people to circumvent them? When I mentioned this exemption to our safety guy at the Million Miler event last week, his first words were, "I wonder who they paid off?"  

Here's the actual letter C.R. England sent to the FMCSA requesting the exemption.  It's only four pages, so a quick read.  I'm going to excerpt the parts I have comments on. There are many. Keep in mind as you're reading this, that C.R. England owns and runs the trucking school they're talking about.  Here we go:

THE TEXT IN BOLD IS FROM THEIR LETTER TO THE FMCSA, MY THOUGHTS FOLLOW.

C.R. England seeks an exemption from the requirement that those accompanying a Commercial Learner's Permit ("CLP") holder must be physically present at all times in the front seat of a Class 8 truck on the condition that they have successfully passed an approved CDL skills test.

That's the condition? That they passed a test? I would think they have a vested interest in passing their own students.  It's their school. And they'd never pass a student who wasn't fully qualified to get them on the road, working and making money for them as quickly as possible, would they?

As the FMCSA is well aware, the trucking industry is desperately in need of qualified and well-trained drivers to meet the ever-growing demand for shipping needs. However, subpart 383.25(a)(1) limits C.R. England's ability to effectively and efficiently recruit, train, and employ new entrants to the industry. The exemption is requested due to the significant burden that this rule may create on the driver supply for C.R. England.

The rule doesn't affect how many people are available for trucking jobs. What it affects is the amount of people C.R. England can get from training to pulling freight. The quicker that happens, the sooner the company can start making money.

Under 383.25(a)(1), however, a CLP holder must be accompanied at all times by a CDL holder who, in turn, must be physically present in the front seat of the vehicle next to the CLP holder and in on-duty status during this time. This requirement appears to apply even after the CLP holder successfully passes the CDL skills test.

Yes, that's right.  A CDL holder must be physically present in the front seat while the person with the LEARNER'S PERMIT is driving.  Is this a difficult concept to grasp?  Passing the CDL skills test means nothing.  Especially when the test is given by the school owned and run by C.R. England. It seems to me they'd do whatever they can to get the student driver to pass that test.

I went to an independent trucking school that offered 13 days of training.  I paid $6,200 out of my own pocket to go to that school and chose it specifically for the short program because I wanted to get in the truck with Ed and be trained by him as soon as possible. In that school, I saw them pass students that didn't seem to "get it", so I know there's a pretty good chance the students C.R. England wants to put behind the wheel, aren't fully qualified.  That's just how trucking schools work. There's a reason they call them "CDL mills". The limited practical portion of the driving school testing isn't indicative of real-life scenarios, so in my opinion, it means very little in the way of indicating someone's driving skill. There's not a lot of time behind the wheel and you often don't have one-on-one training.

In fact, while I was in trucking school and driving during the "practical" portion of my training, I was hit by a dump truck that sheared the driver's side mirror off the 18-wheeler I was driving. That could have been bad news bears for me and the three other people in the truck with me.  Two of them weren't even wearing seatbelts.  Yet, guess what?  I still passed the practical portion of my training program and was granted a CDL.  Because I had 13 days total schooling consisting of a "CDL skills test and practical driving time".  

Trucking schools teach just enough to put a CDL in someone's hand. But the difference between me and the C.R. England students, is that I was not put behind the wheel of my own truck after I left training.  I wasn't going to be driving alone, without a trainer in the passenger seat, for a company who'd be using me on team runs so they could make money.

In fact, I didn't go work for a company at all.  I was going to be driving team with Ed, who was a leased owner-operator. I spent over 315 hours training with Ed, being evaluated, and then had to do a driving test with the safety instructor at the company we're leased to before I could be cleared to drive without someone in the passenger seat. Still, even after solo driving was approved, I didn't drive alone for months and months and months after that.

And before I started driving I had been in the truck with Ed, as a passenger, for two years prior to taking my class. I had an understanding about what life on the road and in a truck was like. I observed Ed driving on a daily basis. I saw how he maneuvered on the highway, I saw how he wrangled his truck into tight spaces while backing up, I watched him load freight, and I observed him dealing with customers. I learned how to be safe without even realizing I was learning.

C.R. England isn't the only trucking company whose school doesn't provide adequate training but they are the only one who's requested and received an exemption to Part 383.25 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations.   

This rule places C.R. England in an untenable position. Either we send the driver to their home state by bus or airplane, at C.R. England's expense, and hope that the CLP holder obtains the final CDL and returns to C.R. England, or C.R. England must incur double the cost for about half of the production by sending them to their home state on one of our trucks.

At C.R. England's expense?  So?  These are their students.  And they will eventually be C.R. England drivers, since they had to make a 9-month commitment to work for them in order to get the free schooling.  Which isn't really free by the way, if you're obligated to work for them for 9 months. That's more like bartering or indentured servitude. Training costs for any industry are a risk, because you can never be sure the money, time, and effort put into training will turn out to be worth it. That's just the cost of doing business.

And it's really hard to take their cry of losing money seriously when we know they reported revenue of $3 billion in 2014. Also -- and I don't know if this is the case since they run their own school -- but it's possible the school (depending on which state it's in) is eligible for funds from the Commercial Drivers License Program Implementation Grant, which is funded by the annual appropriations act. In 2014, that fund amounted to $30 million dollars and the minimum federal award amount was $50,000.  This may not apply to C.R. England, but even if they don't get federal money, they can still fall back on that $3 billion.

It is inefficient for C.R. England because it will incur the added expense of bus fare or airfare and C.R. England will also give up any influence over whether the driver actually obtains a formal CDL and returns to work. In this competitive job market, carriers will be hard pressed to send new drivers, for whom they have invested significant recruiting and training resources, to a different state with little influence over whether they actually begin working for the carrier or immediately leave for a competing carrier or industry.

Wait...they're afraid their students aren't going to come back??  But C.R. England is offering them such a great opportunity. Why wouldn't they come back? Hmm. I've trained for jobs in the past and it never occurred to me to take my training and go elsewhere when I was done. So because they don't want to incur expense to send their students home, and they aren't confident they've provided enough reason for the students to come back, they want to compromise the safety of the student, the driver trainer, and the motoring public to get the student driving as soon as possible. That's a bit self-serving, dontcha think?

Furthermore, drivers will not be able to utilize the training they just received and they may see some attrition in their skill set due to the days or weeks spent without driving as they travel home to obtain a formal CDL. This attrition of driver skills will have a negative impact on safety.

So they're telling the FMCSA outright that the students -- the ones who went to C.R. England's very own Premier Trucking School, the ones they speak so highly about in regard to the education they provide, the ones they're asking for an exemption for -- are, in a matter of days or weeks, going to forget what they've learned?  Really??  They are actually admitting, to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, that their very own training isn't comprehensive enough to be remembered between the time the student leaves the school and gets behind the wheel of an 80,000 pound vehicle?  Wow.

The exemption sought would apply only to those who have passed the CDL skills test and hold a CLP.

I had a CLP within my first week of class. As a group we crammed for the written test, went to the DMV, regurgitated our answers into the computers we took the multiple choice tests on, and left the building with our learner's permits in hand.  It's bad enough C.R. England is asking for this exemption, but man, what the hell was the FMCSA thinking?? 

The number of drivers that would operate under the terms of this waiver would likely be several thousand per year.
Several thousand??  That's oh, I don't know...several thousand more than I'm comfortable with.

The exemption will result in a level of safety that is greater than the level of safety of the rule without the exemption. The only difference between a CLP holder who has passed the CDL skills test and a CDL holder is that the latter has waited in line at the DMV and has received the hard copy CDL. The practical result of the exemption is that a CLP holder who has passed a CDL skills test would be able to drive without the requirements of subpart 385.25(a)(1) and begin immediate and productive on-the-job training. This will allow them to hone their recently acquired driving skills and put them to work (in addition to immediately earning an income).

I know everyone has to start somewhere but I don't think putting a new student behind the wheel of an 80,000 pound vehicle immediately after schooling, without constant and immediate supervision, will result in a greater level of safety. They run their trucks during the 30-day training period as a team truck, with a trainer that may have only had six-months' experience themselves.  That's scary. 

THIS is their training timeline.

Truth be told, I don't have much faith in these driver trainers to begin with.  I can't tell you how many drivers I've met that have bragged about being made a driver trainer within a year or even months of them completing trucking school themselves.  At C.R. England, all trainers must have a minimum of six months' safe driving experience before they can become a trainer. Six months??  They're letting someone become a trainer because they haven't hit anything in six months? That's literally putting someone who doesn't know what they hell they're doing, in charge of observing and teaching someone else who doesn't know what the hell they're doing.  

My instructor at trucking school had been driving for over 40 years. The guy who took us out on the road to do our exam had been driving for over 25 years.  And when Ed taught me how to drive, he'd already been driving for 10 years, four of them as an owner-operator. 

C.R. England and the people who support them are saying that for all intents and purposes, the students have adequately proven that they have passed their skills tests (written and practical), and all that's left for them to do before they are set loose, is to "stand in line at the DMV". That the last step to being the recipient of a shiny new CDL is just a formality.

Well, it's a formality we've all had to abide by.  

First, if the exemption is not granted, carriers will need to cover the cost for drivers returning to their home states to receive their CDLs. This will necessitate an increase in school tuition costs. As tuition goes up school becomes less affordable. Most drivers arriving at our schools are in immediate need of a steady income. They understand it will be delayed because of the time they spend in school. Nevertheless, they are stretched to the limit when they receive their first pay check. To delay the first pay check by another week or two, or more, will have a devastating effect on people who are doing their best to provide for their families.

Since when do billion dollar corporations give a shit about the people who work for them? Since almost never, that's when. They don't care about the price of trucking school, and if they cared so much about their students having immediate steady income, they'd provide it to them.

Finally, an unintended outcome of the new rule will be that carriers making a significant investment in driver education and training will lose their incentive to continue because a large percentage of their graduates will be lost to competitors.

C.R. England (and other companies) are making a helluva lot of money with the students they train to be drivers. Their ROI is more than adequate. I'd be willing to bet that C.R. England makes in 1-2 runs what it costs them to train that driver. And once that debt is satisfied, everything else that truck makes, goes to the company. And the driver, working for the first 30 days/15K miles with the driver trainer and the next 60 days as team driver making 13 cents per mile, gets to gross maybe $400 to $600 per week, which is crap.  The company likely makes more than 10 times that amount on each load they pull. 

So can you see why people have some doubts about this exemption? Can you see why I have doubts about the skill set these students are leaving the school with? They just don't have enough training to be allowed to drive without someone sitting next to them.

At the same time the FMCSA is working to implement minimum driver training standards for entry-level drivers of commercial motor vehicles, they're granting an exemption to a trucking company whose training for those very same entry-level drivers is severely lacking. Not to mention that company's already abysmal safety record.

On C.R. England's website, they have a page detailing what the students should expect when they're trained at C.R. England. Are you seeing the same thing I'm seeing?  Because this is what I'm seeing:

Of the 17 days they attend the school, they will spend the first seven days in the classroom. Let's keep in mind some of these people have never even seen a truck up close. Never been in one, never knew anyone who drove one, didn't even consider it as a job until the idea somehow presented itself.

17 days.  It's just not enough time.  They can't possibly learn enough.  They're not possibly safe enough.  And they absolutely don't know how to operate that vehicle in all seasons and all situations. C.R. England has been putting unqualified, unsafe drivers on the road for years.  They are pushed beyond their limits, with inadequate training, so the company can continue to make billions of dollars. 

They want you to think they offer great training, which is why another page on their site contains reviews they've received on their training program and their company in general. There are nine cherry-picked reviews dating back to September 2014.  So in 10 months, they were able to pick out only nine good reviews.  If you were to go to the place where they got those reviews, you'll find a different story.  At Indeed.com, you'll see that C.R. England has over 270 reviews and Glassdoor.com lists 145 reviews.  Not all of them are glowing.

Since this post is primarily about inadequate training, let's go back for a minute to what the C.R. England Twitter author said just a little over two weeks ago:

To that I will say this: 

How much training, exactly, does someone need to NOT hit a building?

That's right. One of the C.R. England drivers who has proven they don't need any more training, HIT A BUILDING a little over a month ago.

Makes me wonder if the FMCSA knows how to Google.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2014: The Value Of This Place Continues To Increase
2013: Bursts Of Light And A Bean
2012: Cool As A Cucumber
2011: I Think We Have A Winner
2010: Progressively Yours,
2009: Spill It
2008: I’ve NEVER Colored Inside The Lines. Why The Surprise?
2007: I Didn’t Make It, But I Ate It
2006: Sorry, no post for this day.
2005: Slim Or None! I’ll Take None.

Supreme Love

photo source: CNN

Today the Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage rights nationwide, a landmark victory for gay rights.  Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote, "No longer may this liberty be denied.  No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice and family.  In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were."

I've always joked that "the gays" loved me. They do.  I have a lot of gay friends. And I love them. I also love that they now have the same right as I do to make their love for their someone special official. No matter where they live.

Like these two guys did, who've been together for 54 years.  FIFTY FOUR.  For anyone to say that their love is different, or perverse, or going to be the demise of a nation, has more than a few screws loose.  These guys have been living their lives for 54 years, together, loving each other, unbeknownst to you, and it didn't affect your life one little smidge. Did it? No.

It doesn't affect you.  And it doesn't affect me.

A lot of people think being gay and gays getting married is wrong because the bible says it's wrong.  Really?  Well, since they're going to pull out the Old Testament scripture, you know what else the OT says you're not supposed to do?  Lots.  Eat bacon. Or shellfish.  Wear clothing of mixed fabric. Cut your hair. Shave your beard. Get tattoos. Hold a grudge. Drink wine. Work on Sunday.

Wait, there's more.  Divorce.  Getting remarried after divorce.  Premarital sex.  Lusting after someone.  Wearing sexy clothing or flashy jewelry. Gossip. Cheating (or even thinking about cheating). Having a child out of wedlock. Eating too much (gluttony). Using birth control. Wearing the clothing of the opposite sex (what, no boyfriend tees? button downs? flannel shirts? jeans?). Oppressing the poor and vulnerable.  And that's New Testament stuff.

Wow.  We're in a shitload of trouble.  In fact, every single person I know is going to the fiery depths of hell according to this.  And let's not even get started on Caitlyn Jenner. See, here's the thing - you can't really judge others because they sin differently than you. And although we all do it - I'm super-judgmental regarding just about everything - some of us don't agree that laws should be made to prevent someone from enjoying something just because you don't.

Well, except for the gun thing and the pedophile thing.  There's no reason for the average person to own a gun (other countries get by just fine without armed citizens) and there's certainly no excuse for doing anything inappropriate with a child.  Those people have a special kind of hell in store for them and there absolutely should be laws and punishments for anyone who even thinks about it.

But let's get back to the gay thing.  Most of the opposition is coming from religious, conservative, Republican, bible-thumping people. Don't skewer me, those are the facts. Almost every person who's spoken out has made some connection to religion or God or the bible.  And there are people who think this Supreme Court decision means the end of times.  Can I just say how ridiculous that is?  I mean, it's actually laughable. I seriously cannot fathom how a person not only thinks it, but then lets the thought fall out of their mouth. It tells me they're so removed from reality that they think what they're saying has merit. They don't have to agree with it, but calling for the end of times?  C'mon.

There's a long list of predictions for things that are supposed to end the world as we know it. They have never and will never come true.  These predictions date back to...well, let's just say Jesus was probably sitting at the kitchen table having a cup of coffee and reading about the end times from his copy of Chiseled Stone Tablet Daily.  

But let's look at something that's not so rooted in radical religious thought.  Someone online said that the country will fall apart if marriage equality gets passed, and that no country who has sanctioned gay relationships has ever remained intact.

Really??

Well, except for these countries:

The Netherlands (2001)

Belgium (2003)

Canada (2005)

Spain (2005)

South Africa (2006)

Norway (2009)

Sweden (2009)

Argentina (2010)

Iceland (2010)

Portugal (2010)

Denmark (2012)

Brazil (2013)

England and Wales (2013)

France (2013)

New Zealand (2013)

Uruguay (2013)

Luxembourg (2014)

Finland (2014)

Scotland (2014)

Ireland (2015)  

Tell me again how these countries are falling apart?

And then tell me why the United States is behind all industrialized countries (and even some less developed countries) when it comes to things that are important - peace, quality of life, education, literacy, reading, science, math, linguistic diversity, global competitiveness, freedom of the press, health care. Yet we lead with murder rates, oil consumption, gun deaths, teen pregnancy, and incarcerated persons, among other crap you don't want to be first in.   

We can't even get it right with the food we eat - the United States has no federal laws banning GMO use, yet "more than 60 countries around the world, including Australia, Japan, and all of the countries in the European Union have significant restrictions or outright bans on the production and sale of GMOs".

We have climate-change deniers.  People who aren't even scientists just spoutin' their scientific opinions.

Shit, we can't even get internet that's faster than other countries.

Perhaps the anti-black, anti-Mexican, anti-Muslim, anti-healthcare, anti-public transportation, anti-everything, including the anti-gay sentiment, has to do with America's "willful embrace and exaltation of ignorance...evidenced all around us". Clearly, lack of knowledge and information is preventing critical growth in some people.

We're not going to fall apart because we give equal rights to the citizens of our country.

Your life isn't going to change ONE SINGLE IOTA because a few gay people get married.

Use your brain.  Think critically.  And stop letting the bible, your mother, or your grandpappy's voice in your ear tell you what's right and wrong. Have some common sense. You don't have to like it.  You don't have to agree with it.  There's tons of shit I don't like or agree with, which if you're a regular reader you already know.

This decision doesn't take away any of your rights.  NONE.

It just makes the lives of others a little more beautiful.



~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2014: Unfuzzed
2013: I Think We May Be Following A Derecho. Or Is It An Izquierda?
2012: This One Time, At Summer Camp…
2011: Into The Wild
2010: It Was Clear The Moment You Opened Your Mouth
2009: Eddie Captures A Sunset Friday
2008: Pelicans Enjoying Their Rule Of The Lake
2007: Bigfoot
2006: There Is A Reason People Try To Repress Certain Childhood Memories
2005: Painted Ladies

140 Characters Just Doesn't Cut It

I came across a video yesterday that was making the rounds on Facebook. As I was watching it, the very first thought that came to mind - after the incredulous "Whaaatttt???" that came out of my mouth - was, "At least he has a licensed CDL holder in the seat next to him."

That thought stemmed from the recent ruling the FMCSA made regarding Utah-based carrier C.R. England, exempting them from federal rules that require a commercial driver's license holder to be seated next to a driver holding only a commercial learner's permit, while the CLP holder is operating a commercial vehicle.

For those of you who don't understand what this means, it's similar to not letting your 15-year-old with a learner's permit, out of your sight while they're driving.  The regs state, "The CDL holder must at all times be physically present in the front seat of the vehicle next to the CLP (commercial learner's permit) holder, and must have the CLP holder under observation and direct supervision."

The reason for this is so the CLP holder doesn't meet his friends at the Dairy Queen and do smokey burnouts in the parking lot.  Wait, that's your 15-year-old.  Seriously though, the reason for this should be so obvious that if you don't see it, you really need to consider having your head examined.

I'll be the first one to tell you that driving a truck is like driving a big car, but I'll also tell you that driving a car for 23 years before I drove a truck, didn't fully prepare me for operating an 18-wheeler. And I'm an awesome driver.

I learned how to drive in New York and was tackling New York City and the tri-state area (NY, NJ, CT) before I was out of my teens.  I drove in snow and ice. I snaked through country back roads to escape the traffic caused by Sullivan County bungalow dwellers. I traveled I-95 just to go to a concert out of state. Ask any trucker what I-95 is like in that area - many of them refuse to even service the Northeast.  They're that scared of the traffic. And the congestion. And hell, maybe even the people.

I frequently traveled almost two hours from the Catskill Mountains to visit my family in Westchester County, Yonkers, Long Island, and The Bronx. I traversed the George Washington Bridge (both levels!) and maneuvered along the Major Deegan with the precision of a synchronized swimmer. I drove people to the airport, for Chrissake! Newark, La Guardia, and JFK. I was good.  Yet with all the spectacular driving I did, I still needed Ed in the seat next to me when I left trucking school and got behind the wheel of our rig.    

So upon hearing of the ridiculous decision the FMCSA made (WTF were they thinking?) because C.R. England asked nicely (pretty please, with a cherry on top?), I did what any annoyed social media participant would do.

I tweeted.
 

Unlike future @CREngland drivers, at least he has a licensed CDL holder sitting next to him. http://t.co/ht2WMCwVOO via @livetrucking

— Salena Lettera (@SalenaLettera) June 18, 2015

I should have included the FMCSA in this first tweet, but I didn't.  Because duh, I was making fun of C.R. England and the drivers they were planning to cut loose on the highways.  The fetuses of trucking.

This was their response to that tweet.

So I gave them a link to refresh their memory.

And in their smug "there's always 2 sides and I'm including a smiley face" response, they linked to this.  

An article which includes a paragraph pointing to exactly where their request stems from. Their bank accounts.

It stated, "The carrier complained that it was too expensive to get new drivers back to their local DMVs to pick up their CDLs, impairing their ability to train and hire new drivers.  This despite the fact that Google Finance reports C.R. England's revenues for 2014 as just shy of $3 Billion with after-tax earning of over $200 million."

Too expensive?  You did see the $3 BILLION dollar part, right?  You think in the $200 MILLION they get to keep out of that $3 BILLION, they can find money for a round-trip plane ticket for the driver who's going to help them make their next $200 million?

Their petition read, "Either we send the driver to their home state by bus or airplane, at C.R. England's expense, and hope that the CLP holder obtains the final CDL and returns to C.R. England, or C.R. England must incur double the cost for about half of the production by sending them to their home state on one of our trucks."  

What bullshit.  So because it's going to cut into their millions and billions, they're willing to let an inexperienced driver - granted, with a licensed CDL holder somewhere in the truck with them - take a trip back to their home state without adequate supervision while they're behind the wheel?

Remember up there when I said I needed Ed sitting next to me?  That's because stuff happens.  And sometimes you don't even have a chance to yell, "Wake up! I have a question."  You need a second set of eyes.  Because you honestly don't know what the hell you're doing.  You just took a test a 5th grader can pass, and have maybe driven around a parking lot for a few weeks.  Or taken the big journey a few miles on an interstate.  Or, learned how not to run over a sign when your trailer is tracking behind you around a turn.

It's a weird experience because in your mind you're saying, "What the hell?  I know how to drive.  Why is this so hard?"  Your shoulders and arms hurt from gripping the wheel. Your foot may or may not be able to press the clutch all the way to the floor. You forget what all the buttons on the dash do. Or even where they are. You can have 10 or 13 or 18 gears.  With a splitter.

I'm a badass.  Cool as a cucumber.  I learned how to parallel park a 1970 Cadillac Coupe de Ville in New York before I got out of high school.  But when I first started driving a truck, there were definitely times I felt flustered.  Even after trucking school and 180 plus hours of training.

But these folks want to send their students home to get their CDLs. That's nice. They want to both save money and give their students a chance to see what it feels like to "earn money" on a run. Buh. Hull. Shit. All they want is for that driver to start making money for them as soon as they can. They aren't really concerned about what might happen in between.

Really, the trainer is a babysitter of sorts.  A chaperone, a guard.  They're there to make sure the student doesn't get away before the company can get their money's worth. The company is afraid the student will change their mind, or go work for another company back home, and they'll have lost money on their training.  So the trainer provides insurance that the student comes back.

They want to send a team (student and trainer) on the road to the home state of the new driver to pick up their official state-issued CDL. I don't have a problem with that.  I do have a problem with the fact that they're going to let a brand new driver, with 17 days of training, onto the highways of America, by themselves, with essentially a learner's permit, and no one in the seat next to them for any immediate questions that may come up.

But they had an answer for that, too.

Of course there's no data.  Because they don't COLLECT that kind of data.  Maybe they should.  Maybe, at each crash site, they should note how much experience the driver - the gal with three months, the team with 10 years, the six-month-hey!-I-was-just-made-a-driver-trainer! guy, the 35-year veteran, the multi-million-miler - had with their trainer when they got out of trucking school.  Then we'd be able to more accurately pinpoint whether or not a present and readily available trainer, watching their every move, matters in those crucial first weeks.  Veteran drivers will tell you right off the bat that more and better training does matter.

You know, if these people - the ones who run companies like C.R. England, the lawmakers, the FMCSA in this horrible judgement call they made - had to choose a doctor to do well, anything on them, I'm willing to bet they'd want the guy who's been doing triple bypass surgeries for 10 years and not the guy with three months experience.  And I'm sure saying, "Don't worry, the lead surgeon will be in the building while your surgery is being performed." would offer little comfort.

I looked up C.R. England's crash stats, and with my untrained eye decided that they should probably think twice before sending inexperienced drivers out on the road without supervision.  And I told them so.

I knew what their response was going to be, and I wish I could have included in my 140-character tweet, "I know what you're going to say next...they're not unqualified."  Because bam! There it was.  So predictable.

They've proven they don't need any more training??

It's interesting that C.R. England thinks their students don't need more training. After 17 days, they think their students are ready to hit the road.  By themselves, in the front seat, operating an 80,000 pound vehicle, while their co-driver/trainer/voice-of-reason takes a nap in the sleeper.

It's interesting because in 2011, when Dan England, the chairman & president of C.R. England, was the vice chairman of the ATA (American Trucking Associations), he thought Congress needed to "raise the bar" for new companies entering the industry by requiring them to successfully complete training and an examination  (whatever that means) before being permitted to operate. And they should also be subject to a safety audit six months in, not the 18 months later that was standard at that time.

Grammatically incorrect photo courtesy of crengland.com

Waaiiiittt a minute.  So new "companies" should undergo extensive training before they're allowed to operate, but students can just drive willy-nilly to go pick up their laminated CDL?

Look, I don't have time to read all this crap and comb through the double-speak deciding the safest way to operate a truck, but it doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that 17 days isn't enough time to prepare anyone to drive an 18-wheeler five miles, let alone 500 miles.
 
And a monkey could pass the written exams.  Hell, you can study for the exam and take practice tests ONLINE.  They're almost identical to the state exams at your home DMV, multiple choice.  And depending which state you're in, the number of answers you're allowed to miss and still get your CDL varies.

So, anyway, after this last tweet I had to remind them that all the other drivers they trained - who presumably passed both the written and practical portions of their exams, and had proven they didn't need any more training - were the very same drivers involved in the 707 crashes their company self-reported to the FMCSA.

Of those 707 crashes, 22 people died.  Meaning, they're dead.  No life left.

The report covers 24 months.  The 24 months prior to today's date.  So in 24 months, they had 707 crashes.  Of those crashes, 503 resulted in a tow, 182 resulted in injury, and 22 resulted in death.

Do you know how many crashes that is, per week, for that two year period?  Lemme tell you.

6.79 crashes per week.

That's almost ONE PER DAY.

So you could say, if you wanted to spread that out over the past two years, that a C.R. England driver has crashed EVERY SINGLE DAY.

They're smart people.  They know where to find this information.  Fortunately, some of this data is also available to the public, so I dug up the info and sent them a link.  Totally sweet of me, right?

I obviously wasn't making a clear point. 

I beg to differ.  The report has everything to do with the topic.  Because the topic is SAFETY.  And it's not safe if people are dying.

This was their next comment.

Ooooooh, burn.  They used the note "from the report itself" to prove their drivers are blameless.  Clever.

You can't have 707 crashes in two years - one per day - with 22 fatalities, and not think your drivers may have contributed in some manner.  I know the media, and the public, often get it wrong when it comes to placing blame for who is at fault in collisions between trucks and passenger vehicles.  I've written about that, too.  But have a little common sense.

Not that they'll give a hoot, but I didn't really appreciate the fact that they were implying that their drivers - you know, the ones involved in the 707 crashes that were reported in "the report" that has nothing to do with the topic - weren't in part, responsible for some of those crashes.



Then they used a word I suppose they thought a truck driver might not know - turbid.  It's not a word commonly used, but I do read a lot and I play Scrabble.

I initially replied to the tweet but when I re-read my response, my sarcasm didn't come across exactly as I had intended, and it didn't make sense because they sent a two-part tweet and I had sent my response before the second half of their sentence came in, so I deleted it.

But I do like their very sincere "Sorry you feel other wise."

The thing about this exemption decision is that it sets a ball in motion.  If C.R. England got the exemption, why not every other carrier?  I'm sure all the big carriers can write their own driver-shortage, potential-revenue-busting letters, crying poverty with a million dollar chicken under each arm.

The fact that the FMCSA was bamboozled by C.R. England's request - even though they received strong opposition - is beyond comprehension.  This is the same FMCSA that's always touting safety, right? Well, 92% of people responding to England's request thought it was a bad idea.  Apparently that didn't matter.

C.R. England is older than dirt. They've been around for a looong time.  And they've got their fingers in a lot of trucking pies. They got what they wanted.  For now.  There are still people working to reverse this decision, and I certainly hope it gains momentum.

And if truckers could get their heads out of their asses for one minute, they'd realize that these giant trucking companies amass huge profits on the backs of their labor, and then turn around and try to make the industry less safe with the power they've gained, which in turn hurts all of us.  

It puts us and the industry into a perpetual downward spiral, eroding its core, and causing many of us - who love what we do - to reconsider being on the roads in a country we help run, because you never know who might be driving next to you.

Just remember, there are people like this and this and this and this and this, and even this asshole, being turned out of these schools everyday and then set loose on the road.

C.R. England's exemption may be the cause of your next run being your last one.  



~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2014: Wyoming In June
2013: I Will Not Be Decaffeinated
2012: Sweeeeeeet
2011: Summer On The Farm
2010: This Should Be The Next “New Parent” Handbook
2009: Would You Like A Little Screech To Go With Your Whine?
2008: Jane’s Anatomy
2007: Plus People Are Here To Stay
2006: Baiting The Hook
2005: Purgatory