What I've found most disappointing in chronicling the debate about the need for speed limiter legislation for trucks in Ontario over the past couple of years (aside from shippers not being vocal enough in their support) is seeing the discussion become polarized and degenerate to mudslinging.
How else can I categorize last month’s remarks from Joanne Ritchie, head of the Owner-Operators Business Association of Canada (OBAC), that in considering speed limiter legislation the Ontario Ministry of Transport was “pandering to a handful of (motor) carriers who are either too cheap, too lazy or too greedy to compete fairly” and that “rather than pay their drivers a decent rate, invest in training and anti-idle technology, and implement internal safety and compliance regimes, those carriers have bamboozled government into taking these responsibilities off their shoulders.”
Come on Joanne. Aren’t you going overboard with those comments?
We both know which carriers are pushing for this legislation. They include some of the safest operations in the country. In fact one of the most vocal proponents of the legislation was recently voted the safest carrier in North America. Not only have these carriers invested in anti-idling technology, often before it was in vogue to do so, they’ve also spent millions implementing the latest training technologies. How much more do they need to invest, how many more safety awards do they need to win, to convince you that they care about safety, the environment and their drivers?
They’re so lazy they need the government to do their work for them? In many instances these are the same carriers that keep getting named to the list of the 50 Best Managed Companies in Canada year after year. It would seem they’ve figured out how to compete pretty well.
And from the carriers I know, most seem to have figured out how to compete successfully without breaking the rules on speeding or otherwise. They’re most often the ones that demand their drivers adhere to the rules, including hours of service, rather than expecting their drivers to speed and lie in their logbooks to deliver a shipment. Seems to me these are exactly the kind of carriers that if I was a driver or owner/operator that I would want to work for.
It also seems to me that while the issue has become politicized and polarized, these carriers are the only ones that have not lost sight of what’s most important: the reality that trucking is one industry of many competing for image, funding, and favorable legislation. Its perception among government and the public as a good corporate citizen willing to take the lead on issues such as safety and the environment will determine how the industry is treated in the future.
Joanne your intelligence and hard work have been a credit to your association but I think on this occasion you have let emotion run ahead of reason. For the sake of an intelligent debate on the speed-limiter issue and continued productive and respectful relations between owner/operators and carriers I hope you would consider retracting your remarks.
Comments (3)
I'm not interested in getting into a "mud-slinging" fest but I would like to respond.
Having been employed as an owner-operator and a company driver at “one of the most vocal proponents of the [speed limiter] legislation”, your argument that “they have figured out how to compete successfully” is hard to dispute, even though it seems as though every trucking company and their dog has received a best 50 company managed award.
It would also seem from your ardent defence of this exemplary trucking company that they may be just one of many trucking companies who have received a long list of awards and as a result, deserve to be defended from Joan Ritchie’s assault. You do however fail to mention a name, even though we all know you have a rather intimate relationship with one of them. The visionary marketing boss at this company once wrote in their company news letter: “when a person gets engaged to be married, you are so excited; you can’t wait to tell everyone. Well, we as a company, have become engaged to Truck News!”
To try to evaluate a trucking company objectively from a driver’s perspective, given all of those awards, would seem to be a ridiculously futile exercize unless the evaluation consisted only of praise and worship. So, I have thought if there was such a thing as a driver’s award for a trucking company, would they again dominate the competition?
For example; how would a driver rate a company that steadfastly refuses to pay waiting time at a rate of more than fifty bucks per twenty-four hour period? What about a driver who accumulates ten years of seniority with this company, yet doesn’t receive the slightest consideration in terms of increased home time as a result of becoming a new Dad, without a penalizing reduction in pay? How would you feel after ten years of employment to be told if you’re not in agreement with existing policies and processes, rather than make suggestions for improvements, you can simply quit! After all, the awards speak for themselves.
The list goes on but do you get the point? Yes, you could make the common argument that it is the industry’s, if not the driver’s own fault for most mistreatment rather than a single company’s fault. That argument doesn't hold water with most drivers and what makes this point even more poignant is the fact that upper-most operations management in your exemplary company has a history as a driver himself! Seems the more things change, the more they stay the same.
While Joan Ritchie, in her comments, may have been slightly off-target as to the purposes for the speed limiter proposal, I commend her for speaking out. Drivers have historically been under-represented in our industry.
Posted by Jake Goertzen | May 28, 2008 1:46 PM
Posted on May 28, 2008 13:46
Lou, may Road Safe America weigh in on this debate, sir?
Posted by Andy Bowen | August 26, 2008 10:01 PM
Posted on August 26, 2008 22:01
Yes and the Ontario government also claimed there wasn't enough evidence to warrant having to enforce it on our motoring public when truth be known from Oct 1/07 to May 31/08 5,139 people of our motoring public was charged with reckless driving as only 33% were actually convicted. In the meantime you have these street racers killing people and getting off with conditional sentences, with house arrest? WHATS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE? We at the heart group are at present running a petition to pressure parliament into increasing the penalties for street racing. Please come and view our webpage and if you so wish to do a story? we would be more than happy to talk with you thank you for your time
the heart group
Posted by michael macdonald | September 8, 2008 7:58 PM
Posted on September 8, 2008 19:58