Blog Archives - Page 3 of 63 - Levinson and Stefani Injury Lawyers

Autopilot-Engaged Tesla Rear-Ends Police Car, Driver Assistance Tech Continues to Raise Concerns

A Tesla driving on autopilot has rear-ended a parked police car in Connecticut, once again bringing alarmed responses regarding the automated technology.

The carmaker’s driver-assistance system, named ‘Autopilot,’ was operating a Tesla Model 3 sedan when it hit a parked police cruiser around 12:40 a.m. on December 7th. The highway-patrol vehicle was stopped with its hazard lights flashing on a major highway outside of Norwalk, Connecticut when the officer was working to assist a disabled SUV.

The driver of the Tesla said he was checking on his dog in the backseat when his vehicle rear-ended the cruiser. He told police the Tesla Model 3’s Autopilot feature had been activated and that he was not facing forward at the time of the accident.

The Model 3 also continued on to collide with the bumper of the disabled Jeep, which the officer was assisting. The rear end of the police cruiser, along with the front end of the Tesla, both sustained “heavy” damage.

The driver was issued a misdemeanor for reckless endangerment and reckless driving, but luckily, no one was injured.

“When operating a vehicle, your full attention is required at all times to ensure safe driving,” said a Facebook post by Connecticut State Police. “Although a number of vehicles have some automated capabilities, there are no vehicles currently for sale that are fully automated or self-driving.”

Tesla’s Autopilot system allows its vehicles to accelerate, steer, and brake automatically while changing lanes or staying within a single lane. Still, the feature needs “active driver supervision,” according to Tesla’s website.

The Saturday morning incident has increased current concerns that Tesla is not working efficiently toward increasing safe usage of the Autopilot feature. Although the company’s vehicle user manuals urge drivers to stay attentive and keep their hands on the steering wheel at all times, Elon Musk himself has often retweeted video clips of hands-free Autopilot driving.

Some Tesla drivers haven even posted videos of drivers appearing asleep at the wheel while Autopilot is in use.

This isn’t the first time Tesla’s Autopilot has been part of a major crash. In three past fatal crashes, including a 2018 deadly crash in Delray Beach, Florida (also with a Model 3), Autopilot was engaged. However, the National Transportation Safety Board is still investigating how much Autopilot actually contributed to that particular crash.

Additionally, another crash last year took place on a Southern California highway when a Tesla Model S ran into the back of a fire truck. Although this crash didn’t cause any injuries, it triggered another U.S. National Transportation Safety Board investigation, raising questions regarding the limitations of driver-assist technology such as this, which often fails to detect stationary objects.

It seems this particular issue has been a problem for some time now, without much improvement. We reported back in 2018 that although semi-automated control in vehicles is meant to protect drivers from risky situations on the road, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety had released a “Reality Check,” which warned drivers that “cars and trucks with electronic driver assist systems may not see stopped vehicles and could even steer you into a crash if you’re not paying attention.”

This August 2018 warning came after five different systems from Tesla, BMW, Volvo and Mercedes had been tested on both tracks and public roads. During this testing, the highway safety institute found that when testing automatic braking, Tesla’s system in both the Model S and Model 3 were the most dangerous–they were the only models that did not stop in time when tested on a track.

Still, Tesla continues to release its quarterly reports indicating that any driver using Autopilot is safer than one operating without it. Tesla also claims that this driving system reminds drivers that they are always responsible for staying attentive on the road, and that the system prohibits Autopilot use when safety warnings are ignored.

Clearly, this technology still has is limits, and drivers must always keep in mind that any system along the lines of “autopilot” is not self-driving, but is there to assist drivers with their control of the vehicle.

Bill to Test Hair Samples of Transportation Employees for Drug Use Advances

New legislation, introduced by U.S. Senator Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi), will require the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to explain why its proposed regulations regarding mandatory hair testing for drugs in the transportation industry have yet to be determined.

Wicker introduced the Preventing Opioid and Drug Impairment in Transportation Act on December 4th, a bill which would require the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to submit a report to the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives detailing the reasons why HHS hasn’t yet submitted technical guidelines for testing hair to OMB.

The guidelines are more than two years overdue, and are required in a timely manner under the 2015 Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act highway law.

On December 11th, a U.S. Senate panel advanced the legislation seeking to improve drug testing for transportation workers.

The bill’s provisions will cover truck drivers, Amtrak conductors, and pipeline operators with an effort of reducing impairment on the job within freight and commuter corridors.

“Drug and alcohol use can impair drivers’ and transportation employees’ abilities to do their jobs safely,” said Wicker. “My legislation would help protect the public from these risks by requiring the Department of Transportation to strengthen drug and alcohol testing, research, and programs for drivers and those in safety-sensitive jobs.”

The bill requires both agencies to provide an estimated date on which the guidelines will be put into place within 60 days of enactment.

According to the bill, the report would have to detail “considerations related to eliminating positive test results caused solely by the drug use of others and not caused by the drug use of the individual being tested; and estimate the date by which such guidelines will be completed.”

The proposed federal regulation allowing motor carriers to conduct drug tests for their drivers and potential employees by hair sample is under review at OMB.

“I’d like to believe, if passed, that this language would be effective,” said Dave Osiecki, president and CEO of Scopelitis Transportation Consulting. “However, past congressional pressure on HHS has not resulted in accelerated action on the guidelines, and this language is likely to meet the same fate. A more effective approach might be for Congress to withhold some funding if HHS does not act expeditiously.”

Also under the bill, the U.S. Department of Transportation would need to determine whether it will require Amtrak engineers and conductors to report drug and alcohol-related arrests immediately. It would make Amtrak implement tracking and monitoring procedures, as well as report to Congress details of an electronic record database for drug tests.

The bill would also require the Department of Transportation to amend its auditing system and report to Congress regarding how pipeline companies may require international safety-sensitive personnel to undergo drug and alcohol testing, while still operating domestic infrastructure.

The Department of Transportation would need to report to Congress its methods of reducing impaired driving, including that under the influence of marijuana or opioids. DOT would have to continue researching while determining the usefulness of onsite oral fluid screening and creating guidelines for law enforcement on the use of this screening and drug recognition protocols.

The bill would also require the Government Accountability Office to report on an “assessment of whether the process used by the Department of Health and Human Services by adding and removing categories of drugs to and from the federal workplace drug testing requirements sufficiently addresses the needs of the transportation industry for drug and alcohol testing to prevent drug and alcohol-related incidents.”

Finally, the bill requires that within the first month of its enactment, the HHS secretary must submit to Congress a report determining whether or not to add fentanyl to DOT’s drug testing panel.

The trucking industry has been closely monitor the proposal–a survey by the Alliance for Driver Safety and Security recently found that more than 300,000 current truck drivers would either fail or refuse a hair analysis, a fact which would be enormously detrimental for the industry.

The panel reported this legislation to the Senate with bipartisan backing, but the chamber’s managers have not yet scheduled a date for its consideration.

London Transit Refuses to Renew Uber’s License

LONDON – On November 25th, London’s transit authority announced its refusal to renew Uber’s operating license.

This shutdown comes after London transport officials have scrutinized the tech company more closely than ever, following concerns about imposter drivers and overall passenger security.

According to Transport for London, there has been “a pattern of failures” that placed passengers and their safety at risk, which is a main reason it decided not to extend Uber’s license. Uber has had a tough relationship with London transport, and the regulator finally decided to let the license expire on November 25th after it found unauthorized drivers were carrying out thousands of rides.

“At this stage, TfL can’t be confident that Uber has the robust processes in place to prevent another serious safety breach in the future,” said London Mayor Sadiq Khan in a statement.

Back in 2017, Transport for London had already once revoked Uber’s license before, but had its decision overturned when Uber appealed it and was granted a 15-month license. TfL decided to extend it by another two months, but with an additional 20 conditions.

Regarding the most recent choice to fully revoke Uber’s operation throughout London, TfL said it came to the conclusion after Uber’s systems “seem to have been comparatively easily manipulated” by drivers.

“While we recognize Uber has made improvements, it is unacceptable that Uber has allowed passengers to get into minicabs with drivers who are potentially unlicensed and uninsured,” said TfL’s director of licensing and regulation, Helen Chapman. “We cannot be confident that similar issues won’t happen again in [the] future.”

A recent change to Uber’s operating system made for one of these major issues, when it allowed unvetted and unauthorized drivers to upload their own photos to other existing drivers’ accounts.

Because of this, at least 14,000 Uber trips took place where these imposter drivers–who would appear to be the driver that was actually booked–were able to pick up passengers on uninsured trips.

Some of these drivers were not only uninsured, but also unlicensed. According to TfL, it had previously revoked the driver’s license of one of these particular unauthorized Uber drivers.

Additionally, Transport for London also found another serious breach, in which dismissed or suspended drivers were able to make a new account on the app and pick up passengers once again.

Uber has fired back, saying that because TfL found the company fit to operate in its most recent license renewal, its current decision is “extraordinary and wrong.”

“We understand we’re held to a high bar, as we should be. But this TfL decision is just wrong,” said Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi over Twitter. “Over the last two years, we have fundamentally changed how we operate in London. We have come very far–and we will keep going, for the millions of drivers and riders who rely on us.”

Uber has 21 days from the license expiration to file an appeal, which the company says it intends to do. During the appeals process, it can continue to operate as usual.

In hopes of making changes for the better, Uber said on top of continuing to audit each of its London drivers–which it has been doing over the last two months–it plans to launch a “facial matching process” across its verification system, which is currently powered by Microsoft. This will work by requiring drivers to take selfies periodically for the system to compare with their account photos. They will also have to actively prove their identity by smiling, blinking, and/or turning their head.

If the appeal is denied, it will be an enormous setback for the company, which underwent a $1.15 billion loss last quarter. Shares fell by more than 5% in premarket trading, and Khosrowshahi forecast that Uber wouldn’t turn a profit until 2021.

“If Uber ultimately was not able to operate in London, it will be a ‘seismic blow’ to the company’s European operations,” said Dan Ives, managing director at Wedbush Securities. He added that it “could have a major ripple impact across other European cities,” and that imposter driver problem is not limited to Europe. He said investors should be aware.

For instance, American safety advocates have been criticizing Uber for having less-thorough background checks on its drivers than traditional taxi companies have, as Uber doesn’t check its drivers’ fingerprints.

This isn’t the only instance where regulators have the upper hand over the rideshare company.

On top of California’s recent legislation which required companies to treat rideshare drivers as employees rather than as independent contractors (making Uber provide health and other benefits on top of insurance for its drivers), New York has enacted a minimum wage for Uber drivers (which the company meets by raising prices for customers), and New Jersey’s labor department has claimed Uber misclassified drivers as independent contractors and recently sought over $640 million from the company.

Convoy Trucking Proving the Industry Must Adapt

2019 has been a tough one for the trucking industry. Through continuous storylines covering the driver shortage to serious concerns regarding the overall business prospects for trucking companies, the industry has truly been struggling. Despite all the noise, there have been several companies who have been able to cut through the tension and make a name for themselves. Recently, it was announced that Convoy, an on-demand digital trucking platform, has raised $400 million in funding, which will help it escalate its business model and bring it to market. What exactly is a digital trucking platform? For starters, Convoy’s intention is to cut shipping costs by creating a streamlined alternative to the large amount of wasted space that occurs in most long-haul trucks. The goal is to digitally connect shippers with trucking companies. Think Uber for truck drivers; something we have already seen in the market with Uber Freight.

While the news of Convoy’s new round of funding may not appear monumental, it really is a sign that the industry could seriously pivot within the next decade. For instance, back in August of 2019, The New York Times wrote a piece about Convoy’s emergence within the industry and had the opportunity to speak with Silpa Paul, a commercial vehicle analyst for Frost and Sullivan, a prominent research company specializing in consulting for companies. In that piece, The New York Times stated that “Ms. Paul estimated that services like Convoy’s were expected to grow rapidly, from posting $210 million in broker fees in North America in 2017 to $6.7 billion in 2025.” Further, Paul had determined that the streamlined efficiency would likely not bear on a loss of trucking jobs, because there was already such a severe shortage, as announced by the American Trucking Association. For an industry struggling as much as the trucking industry is, companies finding the potential to garner billions of dollars certainly provides a few bright spots.

Moving forward, Convoy understands that although it has produced the necessary funding to evolve its business model and become a national brand for many shippers, it also faces competition from the likes of Uber Freight. That’s why it is fascinating to see where this brand goes next. According to Tech Crunch, “the company launched in 2019 an automated reloads feature that allows truckers to book multiple loads at a time. It also added Convoy Go, which allows drivers to bring their truck cab and hook up to a trailer pre-filled with cargo.” These advancements are really where we will see how profitable and transformative these digital freight shipping apps will be. While long-haul freight is likely to be where the money is for Convoy, the reality is that there are drivers throughout the industry looking to independently move freight. Allowing for drivers to bring their truck cabs to pre-filled cargo shipments truly changes how the industry functions.

Changing Industry May Bring More Challenges than Previously Believed

There is much to be said about Convoy’s business model and how it; coupled with Uber Freight, will have a tremendous impact on the industry as a whole. Unfortunately, it seems to go unnoticed that some of Convoy’s investors happen to singlehandedly turn the industry on its head already. Currently, Jeff Bezos serves as a primary investor for the company, being that both Amazon and Convoy are located in the same city and largely have the ability to overlap their business models; it’s a genius move by the billionaire. Unfortunately, we have already written about how Amazon is threatening the industry by bringing its shipping and delivery in-house to save on costs. With Class 8 tractors now on the roads for the company, a start-up with the ability to handle the “spot market” with the click of a button seriously threatens small companies. Sure, there is already a driver shortage and Convoy argues that it won’t be taking jobs, but rather rendering shipping more efficient by ensuring that freight is carrying up to its capacity. The issue is that there are many small trucking companies throughout the United States and a majority of their business relies on the “spot market” to turn a profit. In 2019, the spot market has been down. Some may argue that these new apps will help alleviate this issue; however, the long-term ramifications due to who actually has a “say” within companies such as Convoy may present far more issues for the industry and its ability to support small and medium size trucking companies in the next decade.

FMCSA Plans to Delay Implementation of Entry-Level Driver Training Rule

The Entry-Level Driver Training rule, which was originally set to be implemented on February 7th, 2020, will now be delayed another two years.

The ELDT will eventually mandate that commercial driver applicants finish a particular section of training (required in 49 CFR part 380) before obtaining a Class A or B commercial driver’s license, an upgrade to a class B or Class A CDL, or adding a hazardous materials (H), passenger (P), or school bus (S) endorsement.

This rule comes in response to the “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act,” or MAP-21, a federal transportation reauthorization bill which plans to aid the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration in reducing crashes and injuries that involve large trucks and buses.

These changes are meant to further standardize driver training, as well as ensure school districts are complying with federal laws to keep students, staff, and other drivers safer on the road.

In a recent announcement of extension at the National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services conference, FMCSA Administrator Larry Minor explained that the new intended deadline to comply with MAP-21 regulations is now February 7th, 2022.

The official notice is “in the pipeline,” according to an anonymous DOT official. “The whole thing is going to be delayed. It’s mostly due to the failure of the states aligning their systems with the federal system.”

The formal announcement of the delay is expected by mid-December.

The delay is “disappointing,” says vice president of training program development for Instruction Technologies Inc., Laura McMillan. “Our reaction is that, my goodness, the industry has been waiting for standards and a professional-level curriculum for over 20 years. If this industry wants to raise the professional image of truck driving, it begins with how we educate new drivers and prepare them for the field.”

However, Don Lefeve, Commercial Vehicle Training Association President, remains optimistic.

“We do believe, based on conversations, that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety has a grasp of the problem, and we’re hopeful that they can implement it before the two-year delay period,” he said. “But we’re very disappointed that this is not going to be rolled out on time…There are still a lot of substandard programs that will remain in existence (until then).”

As of now, the ELDT has general training guidelines in place, but doesn’t quite specify how exactly to train drivers or even the number of training hours required. The overall intention is to standardize these topics at a national level in order to increase road safety.

The original implementation outline explained that ELDT would create a baseline for training requirements for new Class A and Class B CDL license holders, but changes would not apply to existing drivers. Any driver who was not changing their license or adding an endorsement, and who had completed training before February 7th, 2020, would be grandfathered into the rule and would not need to meet MAP-21 training baselines. After February 7th, new trainees would have needed to comply with the ELDT requirements.

Instructional Technologies Inc.’s McMillan, who has been working on an ELDT curriculum subcommittee, says the current system problems are not limited to the state’s individual regulations.

“The reality is that the training provider registry is not even available,” she explained. “It’s interesting that federal regulators would characterize that this is a state problem and that the states can’t comply when the federal system is not up and available. There seems to be a lack of ownership for this entire issue.”

McMillan also says schools and carriers were supposed to be able to self-certify by October 1st, but that registry, which was set to be the first aspect of completion for the required curriculum, is still not up and running.

Director of safety policy for American Trucking Associations, Dan Horvath, said he is not particularly surprised by any of this.

“We felt that to not delay the whole thing, to at least go forward with the requirements for training the driver [was something that] needed to go through,” he said. “We felt [that] that’s the whole point of the ELDT rule to begin with. We understand that the verification process on the back end would be a nuisance, but not enough to delay the whole rule. However, having said that, we did see that the majority of the comments on the delay were [saying] to delay the whole thing.”

Out of the 1,200 comments made on the rule over the summer, the majority of those who weighed in–comprised of people from state trucking associations, state police, state departments of motor vehicles, and school officials–wanted a delay of full compliance until 2022.

For example, the Minnesota Trucking Association said the rule should be postponed until all systems “from top to bottom” can fully comply with implementation.

“The MTA believes that partial implementation increases the odds for errors and unintentional non-compliance,” said the association. “Motor carriers are concerned that despite their best efforts to comply, state and federal information technology systems will miss information and place the carrier at risk.”

Recent Posts