trucking laws

Minneapolis Announces Truck Parking Ban in Midst of Truck Parking Crisis

July 25, 2021 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

Alongside a proposed ban on truck parking throughout Minneapolis, the Minneapolis City Council’s Transportation and Public Works Committee has recently voted to begin fining violators of the new mandate.

The current ordinance throughout the city prohibits trucks weighing more than 26,000 pounds from parking in residentially-zoned streets, although the weight cap does not apply to other areas. The Transportation and Public Works Committee deliberated this topic at the end of June, and revisited the topic for further consideration this month.

On July 14th, the committee approved a measure that would introduce fine gradations in relation to truck parking violations. These fines will begin at $100 per violation on January 1st of next year, rise to $150 on January 1st of 2023, and in 2024, would rise to $250 per violation.

This comes as an amendment to the previous proposal that called for fines reaching $250 by January 1st, 2023.

“This change gives a certain amount of grace to drivers while continuing to increase the fines,” explained Ward 6-representing Council Member Jamal Osman, who noted that many people in his community work as truck drivers.

These newly-proposed fines come as a response to both business and resident complaints which claimed that many trucks were obstructing fire hydrants, street signs, and car and bicycle travel lanes, as well as reducing the amount of guest parking availability and creating an abundance of noise and litter.

A measure was also approved that would urge the Department of Community Planning and Economic Development to collaborate with other groups in working toward implementing more spaces for truck parking throughout Minneapolis. The measure noted that these efforts should include railroad companies and commercial property owners, as well.

Another provision requesting that the Intergovernmental Relations staff of Minneapolis work alongside regional partners like the League of Minnesota Cities to find solutions regarding truck parking obstacles throughout the Twin Cities was approved, as was a provision directing city staff to report on the city’s overall truck parking capability development and the progress of enforcement and education efforts regarding these potential regional solutions. The report should be delivered to the council by the fourth quarter of 2022, the provision stated.

In regards to the newly-instated truck parking ban, all trucks weighing more than 26,000 pounds would be prohibited from parking on any street within the city of Minneapolis unless they have stopped due to a police officer’s direction, they are actively loading or unloading, or they are situated in a zone with signage which allows for the parking of these heavy vehicles.

As can be expected, these proposed restrictions have been met with strong opposition from the trucking industry–the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association and the Minnesota Trucking Association were both quick to bring to attention the Minneapolis-dwelling independent contractors who have to park their trucks somewhere overnight.

“The Minnesota Trucking Association is extremely disappointed,” said John Hausladen, President of the MTA. “The language adopted today puts the city in a purely reactive role, providing interested parties with only site search assistance. Language asking for greater regional solutions is all good, but it doesn’t change the fact [that] starting January 1st, 2022, trucks will be ticketed for parking on Minneapolis city streets with no new safe parking options.”

For these truckers, there must at least be options for them to park their big rigs at rest areas with restrooms and food options, added Todd Spencer, President of OOIDA.

“In other words, a lot of trucks probably park in Minneapolis because they simply lack any reasonable alternative,” he said.

This mandate comes at a time when truck parking capacity is a well-known issue for the entire trucking industry across the United States–a problem currently ranking third on the American Transportation Research Institute’s report on Top Industry Issues.

Highway Bill Update Brings $1 Billion to Truck Parking Improvements

July 15, 2021 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

As truck parking difficulties have remained a major industry-wide issue for quite a while now, the U.S. House of Representatives has been presented with a new comprehensive highway policy bill.

The legislation has been pushed forward by Representative Mike Bost of Illinois, and its provision will allow states to receive boosted truck parking capability-related resources from $1 billion in grant funding. Bost, who has joined other industry stakeholders and lawmakers over the last several years to raise awareness surrounding the parking problems truck drivers are experiencing far too often, has made this his latest attempt at legislation that could potentially bring resolution to this ongoing concern.

Certain agencies would receive the grants from this funding in order to be better equipped with the resources needed to facilitate safe areas in which commercial motor vehicles can easily park, such as rest areas. The transportation secretary would also be overseeing these particular grants and send reports regarding the legislation’s progress to Congress.

The bill’s provision would offer $250 million toward grants each fiscal year that would be established for truck parking improvement programs as designated by the secretary of transportation. These grants would be provided each year between 2023 and 2026.

The legislation is intended to bring updates to the federal highway policies that are scheduled to expire in September, and is one of dozens of trucking industry-related policies and provisions incorporated into a $547 billion five-year highway bill. Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California has expressed her intent to pass the bill, and Democrats strongly supported the bill during its committee consideration. Republicans heavily opposed.

Regardless of this Republican opposition, Bost believes funding for truck parking capability improvements are likely to come to fruition–although Bost does have some pressing concerns regarding the overall legislation itself.

“The fact that the Democrats did make the decision to put this in, and the Republicans don’t have opposition to it…I believe [regarding] whatever bill we have out there–when we decide on a bipartisan bicameral bill–I think everybody’s come to the realization with the studies that’ve been done that it’s time to make that investment and send that money to the states,” he said.

Boat, who also serves as a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, noted that current hours-of-service regulations, which determine when a trucker must be off-duty in relation to his or her shift, has made it more stressful for some truckers to find safe places in which to park their commercial vehicles.

“Whether you’re approaching a rest area, any off-ramp, anywhere up and down the instate–you see the trucks pulled off to the side,” he explained.

Additionally, the more truck parking availability boosts are delayed, the more opportunities there are for truckers to put themselves in risky situations.

“The longer we take to get it out there and get it started through the process through the states, the more people, drivers–as well as non-commercial drivers–are in danger of multiple wrecks, multiple accidents, multiple deaths, multiple [crimes]–all of the things that I’ve talked about–if we don’t start making the investment now in the trucking parking areas–that will continue and only get worse,” said Bost.

This provision will indeed help ease the worries surrounding this issue, added Representative Peter DeFazio of Oregon, who serves as the chief architect of the highway policy measure and the chairman of the transportation committee.

“We have mandates on drivers, how long they can drive and be safe,” he said. “And so, therefore, they have to have a safe place to park and rest. And, unfortunately, in much of the country, it’s very difficult for them to find a place to park and rest that’s safe.”

Because of this, funding for proper parking and rest spaces is a no-brainer, DeFazio noted.

“It’s reached a very, very critical point for truck drivers,” he said. “They have to rest. We mandate rest. And so, therefore, we have to help them find a safe place to rest.”

This is not the first time truck parking concerns have been so widely discussed–a law named for Jason Rivenburg was passed after the trucker was killed in a robbery when he couldn’t find safe parking in 2009. Because of the tragedy, the law mandated a review of the United State’s conditions surrounding truck parking availability, and was reviewed again in 2019.

During that review, a majority of truck drivers were found to still have major issues finding safe places to park. It was also reported that only about 313,000 designated truck parking spots were available throughout the country.

Self-Driving Vehicle Bill Reintroduced in House of Reps

July 10, 2021 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

The U.S. House of Representatives is once again considering a bill that would boost autonomous vehicle access throughout the United States. The Safely Ensuring Lives Future Deployment and Research in Vehicle Evolution (SELF DRIVE) Act was recently introduced by Representative Bob Latta of Ohio and will work to implement federal standards that would help deploy autonomous vehicle service through a variety of industries and agencies.

In recent congressional sessions, Latta has brought up the importance of this potential legislation.

“Self-driving cars have the potential to reduce traffic accidents and deaths, increase mobility, and improve quality of life,” Latta said during the session, “Autonomous vehicle technology can protect millions of Americans, while at the same time, providing seniors and those living with disabilities a way to live their [lives] outside of their homes.”

To make this a viable option, Latta explained that a federal standard framework is the key.

“In order for the United States to lead on this cutting-edge technology, we need a framework that allows industry to innovate while ensuring high safety standards,” he continued. “I urge my colleagues in the House and Senate to work with me on this bill to better ensure that all Americans are safer while on the road and have increased access to mobility.”

In an effort to boost the development, testing, and implementation of autonomous vehicle technology, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has made it a priority to focus on this legislation. Luckily, the SELF DRIVE Act has, thanks to transportation policy advancement through Congress, been receiving strong backing from lawmakers throughout the country.

“Recent developments in autonomous vehicle technology have prompted the real need for a national [autonomous vehicle] standard to ensure passenger safety and incentivize continued investment in driverless capabilities,” explained Representative Fred Upton of Michigan. “As the auto capital of our nation, Michigan will play a pivotal role in deploying driverless vehicles and propelling our autonomous fleets into the future.”

Upton also urged Congress to finally implement a federal standard for this kind of technology.

“This critical technology requires a clear national standard, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to set up the necessary infrastructure to continue this important work,” he added.

The legislation’s backers have widely consisted of autonomous vehicle tech supporters throughout the industry, such as Ariel Wolf, who currently serves as General Counsel for the Self-Driving Coalition. Wolf noted the benefits of dedication from policymakers on this subject, and their “continued commitment to autonomous vehicles as a transformative technology that will dramatically improve safety, enhance mobility, and spur economic growth.”

Wolf said this kind of support will change the transportation industry for good–a change that has been long-needed.

“Federal policies that encourage AV development with clear federal and state roles while promoting and protecting American innovation can help to revolutionize how passengers and goods are transported,” he continued. “We encourage Congress to quickly provide a federal framework that can accelerate the deployment of AVs on U.S. roads.”

In fact, autonomous vehicle tech may be able to transform the United States’ entire mobility landscape as we know it, according to Senators Gary Peters of Michigan and John Thune of South Dakota (who co-authored recent autonomous vehicle-related Senate legislation). The tech could indeed change the ways in which drivers obtain connectivity resources, as well as overall freight and passenger corridor access and utilization.

“One of the most important opportunities we can seize is autonomous vehicle technologies,” said Senator Peters. “We know that autonomous vehicles save lives, since 90% of accidents are caused by human error. We know that these technologies are also rapidly emerging and are already impacting the workforce.”

To catch up with other tech-forward countries, America really needs to get on board with AV, he added.

“We know that our competitors on a global stage, especially China, are recognizing the benefits of these technologies,” he explained. “And let’s be clear–let’s be absolutely clear–these technologies are coming inevitably.”

Automated Braking Requirement Could Be in the Works for Big Rigs

July 9, 2021 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

automobile mechanic checking truck in the garage, selective focus

A new proposal could be underway that would begin regulating automatic emergency braking system standards for heavy trucks and would likely require all big rigs to have this kind of technology implemented, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s recent announcement.

These plans would be put in place “over the next year and beyond,” said NHTSA in its mid-June release, which detailed its regulatory agenda for the coming months.

Automated braking systems or collision mitigation are technologies able to apply the brakes of a vehicle in a circumstance where a rear-end crash is probable and the driver has failed to brake or steer away. This is possible due to an alert triggered by the imminent danger through onboard forward-collision warning systems.

The agency is working to set forth a new NPRM on braking systems by April of 2022, following its petition for rule-making on automating braking systems in October of 2015. At that time, the proposal was unable to move forward while Trump was in office.

When the 2015 petition was initially approved by NHTSA, the agency noted that it had already been working on heavy vehicle forward collision avoidance research, as well as research into certain mitigation technologies, for a number of years.

The petition was submitted by groups like Road Safe America, the Center for Auto Safety, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety and the Truck Safety Coalition. In its research, the agency studied via an ongoing production system field operational test, a driver-warning interface effectiveness evaluation, and first-generation system test track evaluations.

“Based on this research, the agency agrees with the petitioners that forward-collision avoidance and mitigation systems have the potential to save lives by preventing or reducing the severity of rear-end crashes,“ said NHTSA at the time of the petition.

The agency noted the potential to create safer roads–perhaps for the first time in several years–in its most recent announcement.

“Safety is the department’s North Star, and making our roads safer for all Americans is critical,” the agency explained. “The regulatory agenda reflects this–by proposing to make safety technologies like automatic emergency braking standard, to ensure better data collection for autonomous vehicle technology deployments to enable safe innovation, and to update our roadway design and operational practices for the first time in a decade.”

The agency has indeed been researching mitigation technology and forward-collision avoidance on big rigs for many years, the regulatory agenda added. These technologies include both automatic emergency braking system technology and forward-collision warning technology.

“We were excited because, within six months, [NHTSA] granted our petition,” said Road Safe America co-founder Steve Owings in regards to the petition of October 2015. “That was lightning speed for that organization. But, here we are, six years later.”

The NHTSA was put under pressure in early June to create a requirement for commercial motor vehicles to have speed-limiting technology implemented onboard that would include automatic emergency braking systems and set a truck’s maximum speed to 65 miles per hour or 70 miles per hour along with adaptive cruise control. The requirement comes from the Cullum Owings Large Truck Safe Operating Speed Act, named for a young man who was killed on the road when his vehicle was struck by a commercial truck operating on cruise control. The bipartisan act was introduced by Representatives Lucy McBath of Georgia and John Katko of New York, and has received backing from the American Trucking Associations.

Additionally, a new website was recently launched by the agency to streamline the process of providing it with whistleblower information for dealerships, part suppliers, and all motor vehicle manufacturer employees or contractors. Those wishing to share this kind of information with the agency can now find easier methods of doing so on the new webpage, which will help them understand how they should provide certain information and what information is actually important to disclose.

Because there is such an “important role whistleblowers can play in enhancing the safety of the nation’s roadways,” NHTSA explained that it has realized how necessary it is to finally make this system much more easily accessible.

DOL Rule Should Stay, Carriers and Independent Truckers Seem to Agree

June 12, 2021 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

There has been a lot of back and forth stipulation in regards to the recently-issued rule determining whether or not a truck driver is considered an employee or a contractor at the federal level.

The rule, which was recently officially implemented, was explained by the U.S. Department of Labor as helping to create “certainty for stakeholders, reduce litigation, and encourage innovation in the economy.”

Now, independent contractors and motor carriers across the nation have made clear their objection to the agency’s proposal to withdraw the rule. More than 1,000 written comments have been made in response to this new proposal.

The initial federal rule, which was issued near the end of 2020, aimed to eradicate the ABC test that had been used in the state of California as a method of determining whether or not a truck driver is an independent contractor, or if the driver is in fact an employee. Motor carriers deemed the rule as being favorable and the American Trucking Associations made clear their support. Some independent contractors even issued comments expressing their opposition to dropping the rule.

Regardless, many industry experts understood that the Biden administration’s review of this rule would likely lead to its dismissal. Public comments have shown a desire to keep it in place; however, the Labor Department has not made a decision as to whether or not this will be the case.

“As a sizable commercial motor carrier utilizing both employee drivers and independent contractors, CRST opposes the rescission of the final rule,” said CRST The Transportation Solution Inc., a carrier based out of Cedar Rapids, Iowa. “In trucking, the independent contractor/owner-operator model provides hundreds of thousands of drivers the opportunity, autonomy, and entrepreneurial empowerment to run their own business and work in ways that suit their individual business, financial goals, and lifestyle.”

According to Spirit Transport Systems Inc., keeping the final rule in place will be vitally important, “specifically and in general to the intermodal transportation and drayage industry.”

Spirit operates within the drayage sector with 38 independent contractors.

“These small business owners earn a commercial driver license, invest in a tractor, and bear the associated operating costs attributable to registration, licensing, insurance, and fuel,” wrote Spirit in response to the proposal. “They also invest a significant amount of time developing their knowledge of–and complying with–federal and state safety regulations.

American Trucking Associations has also strongly opposed the final rule being reversed, noting that it believes these workers should be able to choose the capacity in which they earn their income.

“The final rule achieved a streamlined and commonsense process for more consistent application of independent contractor status,” wrote ATA. “The final rule importantly continues to recognize that working Americans should have the freedom to pick the occupation and economic framework for making a living that they desire.”

The agency also explained its belief that the updated description of independent contractors can help ensure that these workers don’t face any potential litigation in regards to an independent contractor’s duties.

“The final rule also provides businesses with clarity on the characteristics of a bona fide independent contractor so they can more easily comply and avoid litigation while ensuring that DOL’s Wage and Hour Division can pursue those who improperly misclassify their workers as independent contractors.”

Contractor Joseph Cunnigham agreed with ATA’s stance.

“The new DOL rule helps me and freelancers like me to build meaningful, rewarding careers,” he said. “For the sake of millions of others like me–many of whom are women and minorities–please keep the new rule.”

Still, though, the argument against keeping this rule is that truckers working as employees are able to earn a minimum wage, overtime, benefits, and will have companies that will be liable–and have better coverage–in the event of an accident. Keeping truckers on as independent contractors is cheaper for trucking companies–but not necessarily better for those involved in a truck-related crash.

It seems, however, that many independent truckers do indeed value their freedom over these benefits.

“The ABC test in AB 5 implemented three factors for determining employee/independent status and resulted in a situation in which it became extremely difficult to even qualify as an independent contractor,” explained James Alburger, an independent contractor himself. “There are hundreds of thousands of us who thrive on our independence when it comes to the work we choose to do, the way in which we do our work, and the compensation we receive for our work.”

Independent Contractor Rule Changes Facing Delays–John Stefani Weighs In

May 22, 2021 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

The regulatory freeze that occurred in late January following the inauguration of President Biden has subsequently delayed the actions intended by the U.S. Department of Labor to modify the interpretation of an independent contractor working for a carrier.

This is a typical occurrence with the entrance of a new president as regulatory landscapes will undergo large changes every time a new administration takes office.

“When there is a change in administrations, it is standard to have a regulatory freeze so new agency staff have some time to review the issues at hand, and the review can delay or pause the regulatory process,” said American Trucking Associations vice president of safety policy, Daniel Horvath.

In February, the Department of Labor announced a two-month delay on the final rule that would revise its interpretation of an independent contractor’s status in regards to the Fair Labor Standards Act. The rule was initially planned to go into effect on March 9th, and the DOL said its purpose would be to “promote certainty for stakeholders, reduce litigation, and encourage innovation in the economy.”

For now, the DOL said it would be delaying the effective date for this revision until May 7th and accepted further public comment regarding this change through the month of February. It had also announced that it would be withdrawing its previous opinion letter stating that motor carriers could offer safety equipment and training to their independent contractors without causing any conflict in relation to their statuses and independent contractors.

The letter was retracted because it had been “based on a rule that had not gone into effect” and was “issued prematurely,” according to the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division. If that rule does end up going through as originally intended, it would give a new federal standard to motor carriers, allowing them to decide whether a trucker is an independent contractor or an employee–which the DOL said would likely be more beneficial than California Assembly Bill 5 law’s ABC test that is currently used to make this determination.

As of right now, it is difficult to know whether or not the modification will continue on as planned, undergo further changes, or be dismissed altogether under the new administration, according to deputy general counsel for American Trucking Associations, Richard Pianka.

“I think there’s an expectation that the independent contractor rule will go away, one way or the other,” he said. “We certainly know there are a number of groups that were not happy about the [independent contractor] rule who are likely to be influential and will be urging this administration to undo it.”

Executive vice president of advocacy for ATA, Bill Sullivan, noted that ATA strongly supports this becoming a final rule. “This rule would provide a welcome step in the right direction, providing fleets and independent contractors with needed clarity,” he said.

Additionally, most public comments collected in regards to the rule changes were in favor of the new modifications, expressing their belief that it would boost work arrangement flexibility, clarity for workers, and business benefits.

However, some groups that have been looking critically into the consequences of allowing drivers to maintain their independent contractor statuses have concerns regarding the responsibilities and pressures that would fall onto the shoulders of these drivers as opposed to the companies for which they would be driving for–especially when the companies are typically the party with the resources to pay for damages and insurance costs in the event of an accident.

“If this rule goes into effect–shifting the legal burden from the large company to the independent driver–it’s all the more reason we need to see an increase in minimum insurance requirements,” said Levinson and Stefani’s John Stefani. “When something goes wrong and people are injured–or worse–the responsible party should have the means to compensate the victims.”

Additionally, when truckers are working as independent contractors, they may often feel the expectation to transport shipments as fast as they can, meaning that a driver may overlook his or her own health and safety to get the job done.

“The concept of an independent contractor–driver–is a bit trickier in the trucking industry because the reality is that these large companies are exerting a lot of pressure on the drivers to get the loads transported as quickly as possible,” Stefani explained. “And, as we’ve seen in many of our truck crash cases, those drivers react to that pressure by cutting corners, oftentimes staying on the road while fatigued or despite hazardous weather conditions.”