Talk:Hours of service

Comments

I made some minor cleanup changes, and I have a few other suggestions.

• I would recommend moving the History section to the top of the page, as it provides a simple explanation of why these rules are important and how they've evolved over time.
• The log book page is important to the article, but should only be used once rather than twice. I would argue that it makes more sense within the article than if it's used as a header photo, but I leave that to you to decide.
• The Enforcement section needs sources. Not much else to say on that - it's well-written, and I don't doubt that the info is accurate (as I suspect it reflects your own experience), but it needs sources to back it up.

Good luck in the GA process - you're braver than I... Duncan1800 (talk) 22:37, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

other HOS

HOS in the US applies to operators of commercial aircraft and water craft. In the US they are all regulated by DOT Other nations have HOS Don't have time for this now but it should be in the lead in, and stubs for the other HOS rules should be created Saltysailor (talk) 06:11, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, I'll see what I can do about the air and watercraft HOS. As for other nations, the EU is covered under drivers working hours, but that reminds me... I need to add that under the see also section. Thanks. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 07:00, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

An interesting sidelight is that IRS gives special deduction privileges for those subject to HOS including pilots and water craft operators (who normally must have a "masters" license to con a ship. Canada enforces different HOS and Mexico has them. Australia has HOS that allow for the driver to choose from different cycles.

minor changes to exemptions

couldn't resist some changes Saltysailor (talk) 06:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

POV

there is some heavy POV problems about fudging Saltysailor (talk) 06:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I welcome your input! I am the sole contributor to this entire article. Outside of some minor edits by passing editors, and a Good Article review, this article is entirely my work. But I would like to hear why you think the Enforcement section is POV. This is a well-known problem within the trucking industry. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 06:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

There is an implication that most drivers cheat on their logs. The example of drivers logging loading and unloading time as off duty is legal if the driver is not engaged in the process. Many drivers pay lumpers so they can sleep while at customers docks. certain carriers have a reputation for expecting their drivers to cheat on their logs while others will not tolerate it. The fact that drivers violate HOS doesn't mean they intended to do so. The HOS is complex enough that human error often is involved. Most carriers who take HOS seriously have the tools to verify the accuracy of the logs as they can track the position of the vehicle and determine if driving is being done. Saltysailor (talk) 04:48, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

My POV is that the biggest problem with HOS is that it has no relationship to reality. There is no requirement to sleep. Most people do not sleep continuously and drivers are punished under HOS for stopping to take a rest when tired. Many old timers simply got out of the business when the rules changed. Another big problem is that dispatchers are rewarded by loads completed and encourage drivers to violate HOS to get the load there on time. Saltysailor (talk) 04:48, 26 April 2008 (UTC)