Truckers News Staff
FinditParts
Safety is a primary concern for many truckers when visiting truck stops. In fact, 80% of truckers in a recent survey said they would pay extra for services at truck stops where they felt safe.
The survey conducted by FinditParts also found that the younger the trucker, for the most part, the less safe they felt at truck stops. However, the majority of truckers do feel safe at truck stops, according to the survey’a results.
The online survey found:
- 59% of Gen Z (drivers born between 1997 and 2012) feel safe at truck stops
- 78% of Millennials (drivers born between 1981 and 1996) feel safe at truck stops
- 86% of Gen X (drivers born between 1965 and 1980) feel safe at truck stops
- 84% of Boomers (drivers born between 1946 and 1964) feel safe at truck stops
Truckers are also willing to pay extra for services at truck stops they consider safe and clean. Fully eight in 10 respondents said they would pay at least 5% more for services at a truck stop where they felt safe. Two in five would pay up to 25% or more.
The survey also found that women drivers are twice as likely as men to feel unsafe sleeping at a truck stop. Over a quarter of women said they’d feel “somewhat unsafe” sleeping overnight at a truck stop, and another 24% said they’d feel “very unsafe.” Women are 12% more likely to pay for a hotel than stay at a sketchy truck stop than men, according to the survey’s findings.
Tyson Fisher
Although workplace fatalities among truck drivers are trending downward, the job of a trucker remains one of the most dangerous in the United States.
That’s according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ latest Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries report, which breaks down the number of workplace fatalities for 2023. As in previous years, truck drivers and other transportation workers rank among the highest in fatalities of all private sector employees.
Workplace fatalities claimed the lives of 823 heavy and tractor-trailer truck drivers in 2023. That was down significantly, by 12%, compared to the previous year. It also marked the fewest workplace deaths among truckers since 2016, when 786 truck drivers died on the job. The vast majority of those deaths were transportation incidents. Only 7% of fatalities were the result of contact incidents, with 6% caused by exposure to harmful substances/environments.
When drilling down to specific occupations, more truck drivers died while working than did workers in any other job. In a distant second, there were 318 workplace fatalities among construction laborers.
Zooming out, driver/sales workers and truck drivers accounted for the most workplace fatalities by civilian occupations, with nearly 1,000 deaths, followed by grounds maintenance workers (226) and miscellaneous agricultural workers (146). Per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers, the truck driver fatality rate of 26.8 ranked seventh. Leading occupations in fatality rates are logging workers (98.9), fishing and hunting workers (86.9) and roofers (51.8).
More broadly, workers in transportation and material-moving occupations represented the occupational group with the most workplace fatalities, with nearly 1,500 deaths. Fatalities in that group dropped nearly 8% from 2022, largely the result of the 12% decrease among truck drivers.
Transportation and material-moving workers also experienced the second-highest fatality rate per 100,000 workers at 13.6. Farming, fishing and forestry occupations’ workplace fatality rate of 24.4 was the highest.
By sector, transportation and warehousing had the second-most total workplace fatalities at 930 deaths, down 12% from 2022. The construction sector’s 1,075 fatalities were the most in the private sector.
Across all sectors and occupations, transportation incidents were the most common type of fatal event, accounting for more than a third of all workplace fatalities. Those incidents made up 72% of fatalities within the transportation and warehousing sector. Among those, two-thirds were roadway collisions, and nearly half occurred on an interstate, freeway or expressway.
In 2023, a worker died every 99 minutes from a work-related injury. Overall, workplace fatalities in the private sector went down 4% in 2023 to nearly 5,300 deaths.
Mark Schremmer
The U.S. Department of Commerce is hitting the accelerator on a rulemaking to address security risks involving connected vehicles.
Less than two months after the comment period ended for a proposal to prohibit transactions involving connected vehicle technology by China or other “foreign adversaries,” the Department of Commerce has already drafted a final rule.
The department’s Bureau of Industry and Security submitted a final rule to be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget on Dec. 17, 2024. The quick turnaround appears to be an attempt to get a final rule published before a new administration takes control later this month. The gap between a proposal and final rule often can be a year or more.
However, the White House still needs to approve the final rule before it can be published in the Federal Register and take effect. As of the morning of Thursday, Jan. 2, that had not happened.
The expedited rulemaking process also could be attributed to the importance of the issue. The agency said the proposal, which was unveiled in September 2024, is aimed at addressing “undue or unacceptable” risks to national security.
“Today’s vehicles contain a myriad of connected components that provide greater convenience for consumers and increase road safety for both drivers and pedestrians,” the agency wrote. “However, the incorporation of progressively more complex hardware and software systems that facilitate these features has also increased the attack surfaces through which malign actors may exploit vulnerabilities to gain access to a vehicle.”
The proposal would prohibit transactions involving Vehicle Connectivity System hardware and covered software designed, developed, manufactured or supplied by persons owned by, controlled by or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of the People’s Republic of China, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region or the Russian Federation.
The agency proposed regulations that would:
- Prohibit Vehicle Connectivity System hardware importers from knowingly importing into the United States certain hardware for connected vehicles
- Prohibit connected vehicle manufacturers from knowingly importing into the United States completed connected vehicles incorporating certain software
- Prohibit connected vehicle manufacturers from knowingly selling within the United States completed connected vehicles that incorporate covered software
- Prohibit connected vehicle manufacturers who are owned by, controlled by or subject to the jurisdiction of China or Russia from knowingly selling in the United States completed vehicles that incorporate covered hardware or software
The proposal received about 100 comments.
The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, which is supportive of the rulemaking, used its comments to ask for more oversight of autonomous vehicles.
“OOIDA has raised safety and cybersecurity concerns regarding the development of autonomous vehicles as the technology has been deployed in recent years,” the Association wrote in formal comments. “We believe this Department of Commerce proposal can help implement necessary federal oversight for autonomous vehicle safety and protect private personal and vehicle information.”
OOIDA also called out the lack of transparency regarding autonomous vehicles and the link between some of these companies and foreign countries. For instance, a former TuSimple executive was accused of failing to disclose his relationship with a Chinese autonomous hydrogen-powered truck company.
It is unknown how much time it will take for the connected vehicle final rule to clear the White House. Additionally, it is unknown if the agency’s submitted final rule has changed since the initial proposal.
“This rule marks a critical step forward in protecting America’s technology supply chains from foreign threats and ensures that connected vehicle technologies are secure from the potential exploitation of entities linked to the PRC and Russia,” said Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security Alan F. Estevez. “The Department of Commerce will continue to take a proactive approach to address this national security risk before Chinese and Russian suppliers proliferate within the U.S. automotive ecosystem. Our goal is always to safeguard our national security.”
“Our regulatory focus remains steadfast on enhancing the security of our nation’s critical technologies,” said Elizabeth Cannon, Executive Director of OICTS. “Without this proposed rule, we would be leaving an open door for foreign adversaries looking to compromise one of our most important assets, our cars. BIS is committed to safeguarding our technology supply chains from foreign adversary manipulation.”
Today’s proposed rule would prohibit the import and sale of vehicles with certain VCS or ADS hardware or software with a nexus to the PRC or Russia. The VCS is the set of systems that allow the vehicle to communicate externally, including telematics control units, Bluetooth, cellular, satellite, and Wi-Fi modules. The ADS includes the components that collectively allow a highly autonomous vehicle to operate without a driver behind the wheel.
The rule would also prohibit manufacturers with a nexus to the PRC or Russia from selling connected vehicles that incorporate VCS hardware or software or ADS software in the United States, even if the vehicle was made in the United States.
The prohibitions on software would take effect for Model Year 2027 and the prohibitions on hardware would take effect for Model Year 2030, or January 1, 2029 for units without a model year.
The proposed rule is implemented under BIS’s ICTS authorities, as provided for under Executive Order 13873, “Securing the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain.” EO 13873 allows the Department of Commerce to issue regulations that establish criteria by which particular technologies may be included in EO 13873’s prohibitions when transactions involving those technologies (1) pose an undue or unacceptable risk of sabotage to or subversion of ICTS in the United States; (2) pose an undue risk of catastrophic effects on the security or resiliency of U.S. critical infrastructure or the digital economy of the United States; or (3) otherwise pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the security and safety of U.S. persons.
This NPRM incorporates public feedback submitted in response to an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on connected vehicles published by BIS on March 1, 2024. BIS is seeking additional public comment on today’s proposed rule from all interested parties.
Additional Information:
The text of the proposed rule is available here. BIS invites public comments, which are due 30 days after publication. Stakeholders are encouraged to submit their feedback by the deadline to ensure that the final provisions reflect broad industry and public input. You may submit comments for the rule by identified docket number BIS-2024-0005 or RIN 0694-AJ56. All comments must be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal (https://www.regulations.gov) or emailed directly to connectedvehicles@bis.doc.gov with “RIN 0694-AJ56” included in the subject line.
Mark Schremmer
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is moving forward on changes to its Crash Preventability Determination Program.
The agency proposed changes to the program in April 2023. A notice that is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on Wednesday, Dec. 4 finalizes the proposed changes, responds to comments and outlines steps for implementation.
FMCSA’s crash preventability program currently reviews 16 specific collision types and modifies information in the agency’s Safety Measurement System to distinguish not-preventable collisions from preventable ones. From May 1, 2020, to Dec. 30, 2022, more than 39,000 requests for data review were submitted to FMCSA. About 72.5% of the submitted requests were eligible, meaning they were one of the 16 crash types. About 96% of the eligible collisions were found to have been not preventable.
The agency plans to add four crash types to the program “to expand the (program) to review even more crashes each year for preventability.” The additional crash types are expected to double the size of the program.
The four new crash types in the proposal:
- A commercial motor vehicle was struck on the side by a motorist operating in the same direction.
- A commercial motor vehicle was struck because another motorist was entering the roadway from a private driveway or parking lot.
- A commercial motor vehicle was struck because another motorist lost vehicle control. FMCSA reviewed many police accident reports that included this information, but these accidents were ineligible for the program under the current crash types.
- Any other type of crash involving a commercial motor vehicle, where a video demonstrates the sequence of events of the crash.
The Crash Preventability Determination Program process will remain initiated by a request from the motor carrier, driver or authorized representatives. The burden is on the submitter “to provide compelling evidence” that the crash is eligible and not preventable. Drivers or carriers are encouraged to submit videos, photos or court documents to support the request.
A full list of proposed crash types can be found here.
The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association supports the expansion of the crash preventability program.
In comments filed in June 2023, OOIDA said the changes would help carriers by adding crash types that can be deemed not preventable.
“For far too long, these nonpreventable crashes have unnecessarily discredited safety ratings for drivers and motor carriers,” the Association wrote in comments signed by President Todd Spencer. “We concur with FMCSA’s decision to further expand the Crash Preventability Determination Program by modifying currently eligible types of crashes.”
Although OOIDA supports the additional crash types, it also said that the “burden should now fall on the agency, rather than the submitter, to overturn qualifying crashes.” OOIDA added that transferring the burden would help keep safe, experienced motor carriers in business and that the stats prove motor carriers shouldn’t have to wait months for nonpreventable crashes to be removed from their record.
In the latest notice, FMCSA said that the burden will remain on the motor carrier or driver.
“The crash data fields that are submitted to FMCSA in the Motor Carrier Management Information System are a subset of the information that is available on the police accident report,” the agency wrote in the notice. “FMCSA does not have direct access to police accident reports or other supporting documentation about a crash.”
FMCSA did not announce when it will begin accepting submissions under the new crash types. The agency plans to publish that information on its website.
Jason Cannon
Chronic stress can lead to long-term health issues, and approximately 65% of U.S. workers surveyed by the American Psychological Organization characterized their jobs as a very significant or somewhat significant source of stress. Research conducted by the World Health Organization found that 83% of U.S. workers suffer from work-related stress.
Despite having chosen life on the open road as a way to avoid the office grind, and in spite of the remote nature of their work, truck drivers are not immune to workplace stress.
“All jobs have stress. Try trucking, where everything you do is stressful,” said OTR leased driver Greg Bazluki. “Why? Any action can get you fired or killed.”
CCJ earlier this year, in partnership with video safety and video telematics provider Lytx, surveyed company drivers and leased owner operators as part of its 2024 What Drivers Want report. When asked to rank their daily stress level on a scale of 1-10, with 1 being not stressful at all and 10 being constantly stressed, the average rating among all participants was 5.1. Bazluki rated his daily stress level a 6.
CCJ also polled its audience of fleet managers and asked them how they thought drivers would rate their average daily stress on the same scale, and those results show that managers believe drivers are more stressed than they actually report to be: 18% pegged driver stress levels at 10, yet only 3% of our driver respondents put their stress level at 10.
Stress, regardless of its severity, can lead to any number of physical and mental ailments, and many of the drivers we surveyed noted suffering from hypertension/high blood pressure (42%), depression (21%), anxiety (22%), and obesity and stress-induced weight-gain (22% and 11%, respectively.)
“The job has only gotten more stressful since deregulation.”
David Higgins, leased owner operator
“As I’ve gotten older the stress of the job is taken more of a toll,” noted 66-year-old leased driver Larry Maples, who added finding parking was his biggest problem as a driver not related to his employer.
And he’s not alone. Parking is the No. 2 concern for truck drivers industry-wide, according to the American Transportation Research Institute.
“Parking is a nightmare,” said 20-plus-year company driver Gary Fulkerson. “Finding a place to park at night is a big concern.”
Indeed, the top two headaches listed by drivers in our survey are things other industries likely consider mundane: finding parking (46%) and delays from traffic congestion (31%).
Parking, or lack of it
Cities are increasingly rolling out bans on roadside parking for drivers running out of drive time, and already limited free private parking options are increasingly being converted to paid spaces.
“More and more places are telling us not to park. Cities are banning truck parking yet still expecting us to make deliveries. Customers are still not giving us access to bathrooms, [and] the ones that do are installing nasty portable restrooms,” said company driver Charles Bolin. “Fleets allow their customers to mistreat drivers. When cities discuss parking bans fleets don’t band together to push back or refuse deliveries to cities that mistreat us. Fleets won’t pay for parking and parking is no longer free at most places.”
With a daily stress level he rated a 10, Curtis Mills said he came off the road and found a job making the same money because he was tired of dealing with problems that had little to do with getting loads from point A to B.
“I’m home every night, don’t have to worry about my safety, where I’m going to park – because I can’t stay on-site – and fight for or pay for a spot when they already overcharge us anyway, and now we pay for parking,” he said. “Make the government and anyone else who feels the need to make all these [rules and regulations] come ride in a truck and see what it’s like and what we go through out on the road… The trucking industry sucks now. It’s not what it used to be.”
Many driver respondents to our survey see industry regulations as an enabler of the parking crisis because they force drivers to stop when their clock runs out versus having the flexibility to stop when (or if) they find a safe place or the driver is tired.
“All the stupid regs would make anyone stressed out.”
Keith DuBois, company driver
“ELDs force us to park. I know when I am tired, and a 30 minute break slows down the shipment,” said leased owner operator Jim Ohlrogge. “Again, I know when I am tired.”
Leased regional driver Steven Rice listed “ELD’s interference in how I drive” as his top problem not related to his employer, adding “Things are really dumb in this industry. ELD telling you to sleep when it’s not needed, or to take a break.”
Traffic and other drivers on the road
The calendar year 2020 was a challenge for most people, but not all pandemic-spurred issues were universally bad. Freight rates were sky high and, thanks to lockdown orders, freeways were mostly empty. The new work-from-home economy, and the halting of many road construction projects, made for more seamless trips from shipper to receiver. The post-pandemic norm, however, saw traffic come roaring back, and despite a now more remote workforce, truck drivers routinely say conditions have gotten worse.
“I have personally seen a woman driving on a divided four-lane, eating a bowl of spaghetti with a tablet on her dash, driving with one knee and cutting in and out of traffic,” recalled leased operator Mike Bartick. “DOT should target the [people messing] around on their phones in cars and pickups. I see it 10 times a day every day.”
For drivers paid by the mile or paid a flat percentage, sitting in traffic is a problem with many prongs. It burns fuel, increasing cost per mile; it burns valuable drive time, decreasing the amount of time a driver can drive in a given period; and it could mean the load misses its delivery window, practically ensuring detention at the receiver.
“Drivers undergo a lot of stress everyday, especially when your primary running area is east of the Mississippi,” said long-haul company driver Tim Hay. “I liked running west. Less traffic jams equal less stress and easier running. Bigger towns mean heavier traffic. Everyone is in a hurry. The local people drive that road every day but they’ll still stay in that left lane until they get right up on their exit then just shoot across three lanes of traffic to get off most of the time without even looking. They just expect you to stop on a dime and let them over.”
Sage words
Trucking is an industry with a high average age – 46 years old, according to the American Trucking Associations – and there’s wisdom to be had from those who have filled up more than their share of log books.
LTL company driver James Duff, whose logged more than 20 years behind the wheel, said he’s learned to cope by focusing on the things that are within his control.
“You can’t control the actions or reactions of other people, only your own reactions to them,” he said. “Deescalate and de-stress when possible. Often times people are not mad at you, you just happen to be there. Likewise, act professional and understand that you can’t control a shipper or consignee and getting angry at them will not help the situation.”
“Every day is different. Every load is different,” added company driver Floyd Crise, himself a veteran trucker of more than two decades. “Treat it that way and you’ll reduce a lot of your stress, and remember to drive like your family is driving next to you.”
For the fleet managers worried about how stressed their drivers are, Victor Farinas, a relatively new leased owner operator with less than five years in the business, offered a tip: “Creating those relationships with drivers and their support staff will create a sense of belonging, and regular predictable pay will reduce driver stress.”
Five Rest Areas Will Get 183 New Spaces
Christian Metzger
MIDDLETOWN, Conn. — The Connecticut Department of Transportation announced a $31 million investment in expanding truck parking at rest stops across Connecticut.
Rest areas in Middletown, Southington, Madison, Southbury and Vernon will get 183 new parking spaces, officials said.
Construction began in October at the Middletown Rest Area, located off I-91 near Exit 20. The $3.8 million project, which will add 11 truck parking spaces to the lot, is projected to be completed in September 2025.
The Middletown Rest Area was the first expansion site, as the state owns all the land necessary to begin the project. The other rest areas will see even more significant expansions, with upward of 40 additional parking spaces planned for Southington, and as many as 60 planned for Vernon. Currently, there are 420 truck parking spaces statewide. When the project is completed by the end of the decade, the state will have about 600, officials said.
The new parking areas will have improved drainage and lighting.
Trucking industry officials have pushed for the expansions, citing a shortage of parking spaces across the state. The shortage has led truckers to park alongside the shoulder of the highway, on off-ramps, or in residential areas, causing a potential hazard for truckers and other drivers, officials said.
“On average, drivers lose about an hour’s worth of their driving, an hour of service, trying to find parking,” said Motor Transport Association of Connecticut President John Blair. “They stop early. So obviously, that affects supply chain issues.”
“The truck parking shortage has plagued the trucking industry for decades, and the consequences of insufficient capacity are as wide-ranging as they are severe,” he said in a news release. “The scarcity of truck parking spaces across the country decreases safety for all highway users, exacerbates the industry’s longstanding workforce challenges, diminishes trucking productivity, and results in unnecessary greenhouse gas emissions. The effort here in Connecticut will undoubtedly make our roads safer.”
According to officials, truckers are required to drive for nine hours and take 10 hours to rest. Because of that, officials said, it is important to make areas secure and comfortable for drivers.
“We’ve seen the trends of truck traffic continue to grow in Connecticut since 2020 to now we have a lot more truck traffic than we did before the pandemic,” said CTDOT Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto. “I think our economy has shifted. People want things now; they order, and they want it delivered tomorrow. So there’s a lot of that on demand, and the industry has shifted, so we just see trucks all the time, and we’ve built out.”
The project is also a key investment for the state. Connecticut’s freight transportation system supports more than 451,000 jobs and produces $50.5 billion annually in gross regional product, officials said.
Author’s note; In the private sector we are providing 400+ spaces for an $8M investment, with secuity and numerous amenities. Contact me to learn more about how you can participate.
