The federal government will let teens drive transports throughout the nation in a move it hopes will alleviate the supply chain crisis - but the initiative is being panned by critics who fear it could lead to disaster.
The new apprenticeship program deviates from current law - which requires truckers crossing state lines to be at least 21 years old - by allowing 18- to 20-year-old drivers to travel beyond their home states.
The push to change the law comes as the industry faces an exodus of 600,000 retiring truckers by 2028, and the Transportation Department estimated last October that 80,000 new hires were needed this year to offset attrition and clear a backed-up supply chain.
The pilot program, detailed last week in a proposed regulation from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, would screen the teens and bar any with driving-while-impaired violations or traffic tickets for causing a crash.
But safety advocates say the program runs counter to data showing that younger drivers get in more crashes than older ones.
read more:
Replies
Age has a big impact on EXPERIENCE... it takes time to gain practical experience. And, experience has a large impact on responsibility. Is it responsible to operate a vehicle without having the request EXPERIENCE to be a safe driver hauling all types of loads, under all weather and road conditions? I'd SAY NO... NOT AT ALL.
Driving a BIg Rigg requires a lot more than responsible conduct... it requires SKILL SETS that can only be obtained thru hands-on experience. 18yr olds have no experience until they apply and pass their CDL examination including the Driving Test. Once they complete a 4-6 wk course most can take the written and Driving exams... but that doesn't mean they are qualified or experienced to operate heavy trucks. How does one get winter driving experience in the middle of the summer or experience in negotiating mountain terrain and grades in the middle of Kansas? Or, how does one learn to safely back against metro-traffick into an alley in small-town, USA?
I could go on and on about the experience needed to be a fully qualified heavy truck operator but let it suffice to say most CDL schools are woefully inadequate in turning out fully qualified operators... these schools turn out learner permit level operators who need to team up with an experienced driver for at least a year... to become qualified to operate solo in most situations... even then they are woefully in need of more experience.
"these schools turn out learner permit level operators who need to team up with an experienced driver for at least a year... to become qualified to operate solo in most situations... even then they are woefully in need of more experience."
As is with any permit and license! When they issue a drivers license to a 16 yr old, they aren't mature, qualified, experienced, neither is a doctor out of medical school or out of residency, and they are a lot older than 18, residency doesn't give them all they need either....and they make decisions over your life! Most of us feel green, inexperienced when we first begin in our jobs after getting licensed, but we find our way and learn along the way, we gain experience by carefully doing, not in school reading about it.
Insurance Companies and their actuaries may have a different opinion regarding 18yr old big rig drivers having equivalent levels of responsibility .... besides it is not just responsibility the insurance companies evaluate when insuring a driver... it's their experience... driving record or LACK THEREOF... Face it 18yr olds in general will not have the experience a 24yr old and older drivers have. I believe that insurance companies want to ensure more experienced and mature drivers over the younger and less experienced operators... and their rates reflect that.
Who is the better risk... a 24 yr old driver with a year of accident-free over-the-road experience or an 18yr old with 90 days of operator training and ZERO solo hours? The answer should be obvious. Which one will be insurable and which may have serious problems with being insured? Which is likely to have problems with the stress and road condition... a driver that has demonstrated thru experience that they can negotiate such obstacles or an 18yr old who has had a CDL for 90 days?
Age is a viable factor when considering ability and responsibility .... it is irresponsible to think otherwise. Statistics prove experienced drivers are safer drivers and have acquired the skills needed to RESPONSIBLY operate their equipment. 18 yr old drivers should be limited to the smaller local rigs or as co-drivers in a team operation with an older more experienced driver as the lead driver.
I'm sure insurance will look at it differently, they always have.
What needs to happen is that these politicans who think it is ok for 18 year old to drive should be involved in an accident with a big rig and wind up permanently injured for life. Then they might reconsider their own ideas. Also this is a plot for the communist trained younger people to take over the country , and get rid of us...
Lopez, I will fight as my family fought defeating the British to establish this Nation. As they have ever since Defending Our Constitution. For those who believe Our Constitution no longer exists then you fight for Survival Only. Animal against Animal with no Ideals or Purpose except One More Day for "Self." The danger of Marshall Law is it never ends. It remains as a Military Dictatorship. The One with the weapon telling the One with the Shovel where to dig, what to grow, how much they may eat, where they may live and sleep. I'm a proud American who blames no one for the circumstances in which I live. I fight to change the circumstances, often alone.
Lynn Bryant DeSpain
Lynn, you stated: "The danger of Marshall Law is it never ends. It remains as a Military Dictatorship. The One with the weapon telling the One with the Shovel where to dig, what to grow, how much they may eat, where they may live and sleep..." The problem with that statement Lynn is that such control doesn't take Martial Law.... all POLICE STATES operate under such rules conditions. What now ... defund the Police?
Our military is unique among many of the world's nations... in that, it operates under the daily supervision of CIVILIAN leadership and oversight. The top three positions in the Chain of Command of every branch of the military are Civilians. One is an elected position and the others are appointed offices, requiring confirmation by the US Senate. The US Military is not an autonomous agent, it is managed by civilians and senior officers... with the civilians ultimately in command. This relationship ensures that the military is held in check from becoming a rogue operation leading to a military dictatorship.
Limited Martial Law functions within specific limits found in the operations order... delineating its mission and DURATION OF AUTHORITY. Local officials are normally left with full operational control of the routine civil functions, while the military focuses on the heavy lifting that needs martial law to accomplish: putting down an insurrection, rounding up large numbers of lawless agents (drug cartels, illegal aliens), building a wall and securing our Southern Border, responding to natural and man-made disasters, etc. Martial law permits the US Military to use police powers to restore civil order and to conduct tasks, during an emergency, that would otherwise end up in unacceptable or impossible delays from legal haggling or political debate. Martial Law is not permanent and its purpose is to assist or restore civil authority when the civil authority is unable to function properly.
Martial Law has its uses and is a very effective way to ensure the continuity of civil government... where it has collapsed and needs to be assisted in reforming. Congress and the President each have the powers to end it at will, Congress by cutting off funds, the President with the issue of an order... as Commander in Chief of the Military.
....and you have trust they would honor the limitations, when the problem goes away so would Marshall Law?
Experience has shown that when martial law has been used in the US it never, NEVER, ended in abuse... it always responded to civilian command and the limits imposed on their mission. And yes, when the problem goes away so will the military and Martial Law.
Marlene, I actually think Trump indicated that he did not trust Pence to do the right thing. I remember Trump saying in DC on that day in Jan., several times, "I hope Pence will do the right thing." I remember he said it that day multiple times, indicating to me. that he had strong suspicions about Pence.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 9 Next