May 20

OOIDA Member Curtis Blackwell is accusing NMMTD officers of racial profiling after beer and booze was found in his truck during a random DOT check

OOIDA Member Curtis Blackwell is accusing NMMTD officers of racial profiling after beer and booze was found in his truck during a random DOT check

Not surprising, and the sad thing is, he’ll probably win. OOIDA reportsl

OOIDA member sues New Mexico troopers for racial profiling
Looking around the port of entry office, Curtis Blackwell noticed something common among the drivers waiting to talk to officers at the Port of Entry in Lordsburg, NM.

Like him, most of the other drivers were black.

Blackwell had been placed out of service for 24 hours after police found unopened beer and liquor in his truck’s tool box accessible from outside the truck. The officer accused him of being on drugs, and made him go through a series of sobriety tests on that mid-August day in 2008.

Blackwell – a veteran of the road for more than 40 years – said tension between truckers and officers at the Port of Entry was palpable.

“Coming from L.A., I can tell when a cop is trying to get me,” Blackwell told Land Line. “I thought, ‘They’re only pulling over black drivers!’ ”

Blackwell, OOIDA Member from Altadena, CA, filed a lawsuit against the New Mexico Motor Transportation Division in early May. The suit names three state troopers for allegedly targeting commercial vehicles driven by black drivers for inspections, searches and detentions in Lordsburg.

The lawsuit was filed in federal court in New Mexico, and seeks compensatory and punitive damages, the removal of an alcohol citation from Blackwell’s record, and a declaration that the citation is unconstitutional.

READ THE REST HERE

Last I heard, carrying booze in your truck without a BOL was not permitted and after 40 years, you’d think this bozo would know it too.

Something we’ll keep and eye on.

Tagged with:
Mar 10

I’ve written before about a dangerous provision of the Omnibus appropriations legislation now under consideration in the Senate. The bill violates the U.S. commitment under NAFTA to allow Mexican trucking companies to operate in the U.S., so long as they meet all the standards to which U.S. companies and trucks are held. If Obama signs this measure into law, Mexico will have the right to retaliate against the U.S. – presumably by restricting exports from the U.S. to Mexico.

Barack Obama opposed the Mexico truck pilot program when he was in the Senate, but you might expect him to rethink his view now that he sits in the Oval Office. After all, he campaigned on a promise to restore good relations with our neighbors, and on a promise to restore economic growth. Picking a fight with Mexico now would be a very public renunciation of both those promises.

The Mexican government has not yet shown its cards; the Mexican Ambassador has merely stated that Mexico ‘will keep all its options open.’ One (subscription only) trade journal reports however, that Mexico will exercise its right to retaliate:

Mexico is threatening tough trade retaliation if Congress and the Obama administration move ahead with proposals that would ban Mexican truckers from travelling throughout the United States, as spelled out in the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta).

The pending confrontation could prove to be contentious, fraught with even more potential peril than the recent “Buy America” flap over steel, according to trade sources in Washington.

Sources confirmed that Arturo Sarukhan, Mexico’s ambassador to the United States, outlined his country’s trade retaliation plans at a closed-door meeting with key Washington policymakers, including congressional staffers and lobbyists, at a Georgetown hotel this month.

Details on the precise nature of the retaliation aren’t known, but sources suggested it could be aimed at sensitive sectors in the United States, including steel, auto parts, financial services and possibly others.

If your job depends on trade in steel, auto parts or financial services, Obama is prepared to put you at risk to satisfy the Teamsters – the lead opponent of this trucking program. The teamsters violently oppose it because when Mexican or U.S. trucks are forced to stop at the border, the cargo has to be transferred to another truck by a Teamster. If you allow Mexican and U.S. trucks to operate across the border, there’s no need of a few unionized workers to move boxes.

If you’re angry at the notion that Obama is willing to sacrifice your job for those of a few teamsters, don’t feel bad: once the U.S. fires the first shot in this trade war, there are likely to be plenty of other victims as well. That’s because it’s impossible to predict where retaliation will stop once it gets started. When the U.S. adopted the Smoot-Hawley tariff at the onset of the Depression, few imagined it would lead to the fall of the Canadian government, and a full-blown trade war between the U.S. and Canada. Yet that’s what happened.

And if there’s any doubt about how Mexico perceives this slap in the face, take a look at this op-ed in Mexico City’s El Universal, written by Luis de la Calle – Mexico’s chief NAFTA negotiator:

Shameful Action in the U.S. Congress

It’s nothing new for Congressmen and Senators of the Democratic Party to seek to prevent the operation of Mexican motor freight companies in the United States. They’ve done it before, under pressure from the Teamsters, since the realization of the opening to cross-border transport in NAFTA in December 1995.

The novelty is that now they do it as a party in government – controlling both the Executive and the Legislature – and should act with a much greater responsibility at no longer being an opposition party. It’s one thing to mindlessly oppose the White House in Republican hands, but it’s another to propose that the U.S. violate its international commitments, deny its own laws and work programs, and take measures tantamount to expropriation, and do all this without due process of law and without debate in Congress…

Two features distinguish this vote: one – to resort to cancellation of the funds is clear evidence that the opponents of the program lack substantive arguments. So they choose to cut the funds… Two, the leadership of the Democratic Party in the House sent the initiative to the full House under a “closed rule” that prevents debate on the merits. The congressmen voted without knowing if the demonstration program has worked correctly or if the operations of Mexican trucks in the United States are safe…

Barack Obama should not allow his own congressional Democrats to corner him and put him in an impossible situation: the adoption of Dorgan’s amendment violated the international commitments of the United States, overturned a program launched by the government and is equivalent to a expropriation of investments made by participating companies… avoiding ruling on the merits of the case and is discriminatory to only apply to drivers and Mexican companies…

There is no doubt today that the Mexican government was wrong in 1995 to choose not to establish a dispute settlement panel when the United States violated NAFTA and made that mistake again in 2001 when – having won the arbitration decision – chose not retaliate. Under current conditions, it seems unlikely that Mexico would allow another unjustified violation of NAFTA and not retaliate.

So Mexico’s former top trade negotiator says Mexico should retaliate when Barack Obama formally puts the United States in violation of treaty commitments, and Mexico’s Ambassador is reportedly telling lawmakers that Mexico will retaliate.

Is Barack Obama willing to say no to labor, change course, and save this country from a major international embarrassment?

Tagged with:
Feb 14

swift_t300Almost a year to the day after Swift Transportations Memphis training facility was raided by multiple Federal, State and local law enforcement agencies, the mystery of who the target was has been solved.

After almost a year of denying they were involved in the CDL scandal, Swift has been identified as the third party tester.

According to a news release by Landlinenow:

After months of questions and two Freedom of Information requests the Tennessee Department of Safety finally coughed up the name of a third party CDL tester whose practices have put thousands of CDLs in jeopardy.

The state of Tennessee finally responded to Land Line Magazine’s freedom of information requests on Friday and confirmed that Swift Transportation Corp. Inc was the third-party tester embroiled in a yearlong commercial driver’s license debacle.

The CDL problem – which has produced no criminal or civil charges – has resulted in an estimated 5,000 CDLs being yanked from drivers.

In February 2008, the state-certified CDL testing center at a Swift Trucking facility near Memphis was raided by the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force, the U.S. Department of Transportation inspector general; Secret Service; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement; U.S. marshals; Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration; and Tennessee Highway Patrol and the Tennessee Department of Safety.

Documents were seized, and the investigation reportedly centered on the illegal issuance of CDLs.

Although no charges emerged, in January Tennessee announced that drivers who obtained a commercial driver’s license through an unnamed third-party tester in Tennessee between May 2005 and January 2008 may be required to do a complete retest, according to the Tennessee Department of Safety.

Tennessee has mailed letters to the approximately 1,300 CDL-holders in that state who obtained CDLs from the Swift-run CDL testing facility near Memphis between May 2005 and January 2008, said Laura McPherson, a spokesman for the Tennessee Department of Safety.

The department has a breakdown of affected drivers by state, McPherson said, which total approximately 5,000 nationally who were issued CDLs from the third-party tester during that 32-month span.

“They will be notified by mail through our department if they are in Tennessee,” McPherson told Land Line. “The states they live in have all been notified – the states, it’s their prerogative.”

The Department of Safety was not threatened with a lawsuit, the spokesman said, though for weeks the department would not release the company name of the third-party tester “for legal reasons,” McPherson said.

Land Line submitted a Freedom of Information Request to the state requesting the third party tester’s name in an effort to inform thousands of over-the-road drivers who may be affected by the CDL issue but may not know their license had been revoked.

Many long-haul truckers work for months at a time before coming home, and may unknowingly have an invalid CDL. Told that states such as New York required retesting done within 10 days, and that Virginia has required retesting by Feb. 6, Tennessee state officials said those issues are between the drivers and their home states.

Tony Multari remembers how odd it was to see the Tennessee Department of Safety office manned by Swift employees, who wore Swift gear on Swift property attached to the carrier’s driving school and terminal near Memphis, TN.

Told they were practicing straight-line backing, parallel parking and other skills maneuvers, Multari said he soon found out that he’d passed the test.

“They told us the people who give you the road test are going to be their actual Swift employees, but they said you’re not going to have the road test given by the same teachers who taught you,” Multari told Land Line. “When we were practicing our maneuvers, it turns out we were actually being scored for the road test.”

Multari – who now works for a feed mill in New York – later started his own thread on an online message board about the Swift CDL scandal. Much of the discussion centered on the pointing of fingers between Tennessee and Swift, and the drivers caught in the middle.

After quitting a good-paying job as a meat cutter, Multari entered Swift’s driver training program. The program – which he said lasted about 23 days – concluded with drivers being sent home to wait on their CDL. “That completed the 30-day residency requirement for Tennessee,” Multari said.

After obtaining the CDL, Multari said he waited five weeks for a load before giving up on Swift and finding a different job. The mega-carrier’s $3,900 charge for driving school tuition remains on his credit report, however.

“We had no choice – it’s not like we could choose to use an outside testing agency,” Multari told Land Line. “We had to do it their way; we weren’t given an option. To a certain degree, Swift needs to be held accountable. It was their procedure ultimately that was called into question.”

On Friday, Swift’s media relations official did not immediately return phone calls or an e-mail message seeking comment on the company’s testing facility officially being named by the state.

Previously, Swift Transportation, for its part, has acknowledged the raid, and the subsequent shutdown of the testing facility run in partnership with the Tennessee Department of Safety, although a driving school in the Memphis facility is still in operation.

Dave Berry, Swift spokesman, told Land Line this past month Swift was trying to find out more specifics about the Tennessee CDL issue and called the situation “peculiar.”

“We don’t know if they’re referring to us or not; we’d like to help the state,” Berry told Land Line in January. He said if it’s confirmed that those who lost their CDLs after obtaining them at the Swift facility in Tennessee, the company can “help them get retested, get notified or do what’s proper.”

Berry pointed out that no law enforcement agency has charged anyone associated with the testing facility or Swift with wrongdoing.

As the company understands it, Swift believes problems related to the testing facility were on the skills test portion, not the written test.

“We’re cooperating fully, 100 percent. Like the state, our interest is safety,” Berry said then. “Our drivers, the state, everybody’s number one concern is safety. This is about the skills test. They don’t need to take the written exam, or do these other things. As near as we can tell – my advice to the driver would be – first of all – I’m sorry that something like this is happening. I would advise them to follow the instructions they had from the state.”

OOIDA’s Member Assistance Department has spoken with drivers who obtained their CDL in Tennessee during the period in question but who can’t retest because they don’t own a truck and are out of work, preventing them from taking a skills test.

Whether a driver has to retake all of a CDL test may depend on which state they live in.

Chris Bretz, an OOIDA Member from Farmington, MO, has been given until March 29 before his CDL “will be cancelled.”

Bretz, who is currently out of work, has no access to a truck. Bretz attended Swift’s driving school in May 2005 as a 21-year-old. He also remembered Swift employees working the third-party testing area adjacent to the terminal.

“They said they were from the Department of Transportation for Tennessee, but they had Swift shirts on. I thought it was odd,” Bretz told Land Line.

Bretz said he was told by Swift after the 2008 raid that he wouldn’t be affected by the testing facility shutdown.

Nothing about the testing seemed illegitimate to Bretz.

“Everything seemed pretty straight up; it wasn’t like they were giving you answers to the test or anything.”

Daniel Nicholas doesn’t share Bretz’s opinion.

The currently out-of-work driver from Oakton, VA, recently received a letter from his home state saying he had to redo the skills portion of his CDL test or forfeit his license.

Nicholas said he attended Swift’s driver training school in November 2005, before obtaining his CDL that same month. The driver and sometime construction worker said he’s upset that no one will tell him why his CDL test must be retaken, and said he doesn’t own or have use of a truck to retake the skills portion of the test.

“The Tennessee Department of Safety won’t respond to e-mail, and when I call, I get the runaround,” Nicholas told Land Line. “They won’t release information.”

For more information, go to www.tennessee.gov/safety, call the Tennessee Department of Safety driver services department at (615) 253-5221, or call your home state licensing agency.

Is anyone surprised?

Tagged with:
Feb 08

LOS ANGELES — A truck driver speeding on a rain-slicked interstate in 2007 lost control and crashed into a median barrier, setting off chain-reaction collisions that turned a tunnel into an inferno and left three dead, investigators concluded Friday.

A report by the California Highway Patrol provides the most detailed picture yet of what led to a fiery tangle of more than two dozen vehicles on Interstate 5 — the major West Coast route between Mexico and Canada.

The collisions closed the busy highway for two days and cost $17 million to clean up and repair.

The report concluded that the double-trailer truck with a faulty brake was traveling more than 65 mph when it jackknifed shortly after passing through a curving, dimly lighted bypass tunnel on Oct. 12, 2007. Despite the bad brake, the report said the accident was caused primarily by the truck’s excessive speed on a rainy night as it descended the mountain pass on the edge of Los Angeles.

The driver, Jose Reyes, survived.

The report said the stormy weather also contributed to the crash. Several vehicles behind Reyes’ truck managed to stop safely, but as others approached a succession of collisions took place that left wreckage over a half mile. Thirty-three trucks and a car were involved, and 26 were destroyed by fire.

Saia Inc., which owned Reyes’ truck, said in a statement that the report “failed to give appropriate consideration to a number of critically important factors,” including what it called a poorly designed and maintained tunnel.

“The report fails to give adequate weight to the fact that at least 13 drivers in the tunnel were speeding and failing to maintain legally required following distances, or to the fact that four of those drivers were operating in violation of hours of service regulations,” said the statement by company spokeswoman Sally Buchholz

“The Saia truck did not come into contact with any other vehicles, either before, during or after its single-vehicle accident,” she said.

CHP Officer Miguel Luevano said the agency had no comment on the report.

An Associated Press investigation last year found that more than a decade before the deadly pileup, authorities warned that the stretch of freeway was dangerous and that steps should be taken to improve safety. Highway officials cut grooves into the pavement to improve traction, but a state police request to routinely close the road in stormy weather was rejected and the state later raised the speed limit in the tunnel from 45 mph to 55 mph, AP found.

Officials at the state Transportation Department did not immediately return phone calls or e-mails Friday.

Most state offices were shut down Friday by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to ease a budget crisis. State officials have previously defended the safety of the stretch of highway.

The pileup sent motorists running for their lives from the 1,400-degree fire. Among the three victims was a 6-year-old boy, Isaiah Matthew Rodriguez, who was riding in his father’s truck.

The report echoed preliminary findings released last year.

Prosecutors declined to file criminal charges against Reyes, but the report’s findings could figure in legal claims that have been filed relating to the accident.

SOURCE: The Trucker

Tagged with:
Dec 14

 

Joan Claybrook, longtime safety and consumer advocate, and pain in the ass for the US trucking industry, announced last week she is stepping down as president of special interest group, Public Citizen, on Jan. 31, 2009.

In her 27-year tenure, Claybrook said in a statement, among other things, the expansion of dangerous triple-trailer trucks was stopped, limiting their operation to about a dozen, mostly western, states.

Some in trucking have labeled her organization as anti-truck, as the industry has been a frequent target of Public Citizen’s lobbying campaigns. It also in the past aligned itself with the formerly railway-funded group CRASH and Parents Against Tired Truckers.

In recent years, her group has continuously battled the new hours of service rules and the Bush Administration’s pilot cross-border trucking program with Mexico in the courts, and has pushed for mandatory on board electronic recorders in trucks.

Claybrook will remain on the board and is helping in the search for her replacement.

“I have led Public Citizen through many tumultuous times in our nation since 1982 and am leaving it now a strong and vibrant organization with a budget many times larger than I found it,” she said.

When Claybrook took over as president, Public Citizen had a budget of $1.5 million and a staff of fewer than 50 people. The group’s budget has grown to around $13.5 million and it employs around 90 people.

 

Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus!

Tagged with:
Dec 02

The Federal Motor Carriers Safety Administration issued a final rule that changes the way states must verify the medical certification for truckers either renewing or applying for a CDL. Phased in compliance deadlines for states, motor carriers and truckers start kicking in on Jan. 30, 2012.

Once everything is up and running on the state level, truckers will be required to present either the original or a copy of the current medical examiner’s certificate. The state agency must then date stamp the certification card and return it to the trucker.

The date-stamped card will be sufficient to prove medical certification for 15 days. Within 10 days of stamping the card, the state licensing agency must enter the information into the Commercial Drivers License Information System, according to the new requirement.
Continue reading »

Tagged with:
preload preload preload