Talk:Hours of service

A note on the graphic in the article

I think the image should be taken down. The sample size of the chart (12) is far too small to give Pearson's sample correlation coefficient (the R-value in the graphic) any significance or power for inference. This in turn can make the graphic a bit misleading to the reader. I read through the source of the graphic on fmcsa.dot.gov but found no specific sampling technique for this specific chart. Thoughts?

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.

There are also Railroad Hours of Service, as regulated by FRA (a part of USDOT). Since this article seems to deal only with roadborne rules, perhaps it should be changed to "Driver Hours of Service." Skabat169 (talk) 01:42, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

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)

The implication that drivers cheat on their logs is backed up with surveys. If you read my references, you will see that there are many different conclusions as to how many drivers cheat. I simply stated that surveys have shown 1/4 to 3/4 of drivers report cheating on their log books. This is not an implication that "most" drivers cheat, it simply states the facts.

You bring up a good point about the legality of logging unloading times as off duty. Yes, it is legal in some cases. However, in those cases where a driver is required to log it as on-duty, there is a lot of cheating. That's all I meant to express and perhaps it wasn't clear enough. And yes, some carriers are known for their tolerance for cheating. Yes, some people (especially newbies) do not fully understand the rules and do not intend to violate the HOS. And yes, I agree that most carriers who use qualcomms already have, in effect, an EOBR which would allow them to punish driver's who violate the HOS but they choose not to.

These are all valid points. The only problem I see here is validating these statements. If there are any reliable sources for these statements then I would have no problem adding them. I am a driver myself, so there was no intention on my part to focus the blame on the drivers. As you can see, I also introduced arguments about how drivers are paid by the mile to try and rationalize why drivers cheat on their logs. I welcome any effort to try and expand the scope of this article. As I said, this is a relatively new article created by me alone. I was shocked to see there was no article about the hours of service.

Also you will notice, in the "History" section near the bottom I mention this fact:

In 2005, the FMCSA changed the rules again, practically eliminating the split sleeper berth provision. [...] This provision forced drivers to take one longer uninterrupted period of rest, but eliminated the flexibility of allowing drivers to take naps during the day without jeopardizing their driving time.

As far as the HOS of other countries, it would be better to keep those on separate pages. We already have drivers' working hours, and if other countries specifically refer to their laws as the "hours of service" then we could always add parenthetical country extensions to the article title. I would prefer to keep this article focused on the US since it is part of a series of articles I have created about the Trucking industry in the United States, and it is already a long enough. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 07:41, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Update: I added a section about companies who violate the HOS. Read the "Enforcement" section again and let me know what you think. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 03:00, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I like your changes:-) If you wanted to make it better you might have a secton on contorversy. Elements would be:

• law suits
• views of different parties
• the regulations have very little scientific basis as different drivers have different capabilities and on a given day the same driver will have different capabilities.
• HOS is an attempt to use practical tools to solve nearly insoluble problems

Saltysailor (talk) 14:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm glad you pointed out the imbalance. There was no intention on my part, it just seems there is a lot more information about the drivers who cheat rather than the companies. You have a good idea there... there certainly is a lot of controversy over the HOS and there is no shortage of opinions. If I have time I will see what I can do about it, but you are welcome to do what you can. I only ask that you use citations for at least every paragrph and for different statements taken from different sources. I am trying to get this article neat and tidy so it will pass Featured Article review and will be posted on the front page! I think it would make it in its current state but I wouldn't mind making some expansions before submitting it. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 00:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

the most dangerous hour

A recent study result shows that the first hour of driving is the the one with the highest rate of accidents! This was bassed on recent data colected by feds and I read it in a trucking periodical. Although no cauaul factors were assumed, in flys in the face of the basis for HOS. Saltysailor (talk) 21:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually this has been known for quite some time. If you read the article it says... "Reduced performance has also been observed in the first hour of work as an individual adjusts to the working environment." I remember my first trucking company pounding this fact into our heads in meetings that the first hour was just as dangerous as the 11th hour, because usually you've just woke up and are getting adjusted to driving again. You are correct but this is not new information and I don't see how that contradicts the basis for the HOS. The fact remains that the longer you drive the more fatigued you become. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 23:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations

Glad to see this is a front-page FA - very different type of topic than the usual fare. Tempshill (talk) 00:54, 26 February 2009 (UTC)