Arresting_Quack
August 28th, 2005, 15:43
Well once again a carrier is shocked their service provider provides less than sterling results.
Carriers often hire consultants to avoid having to do the work in house.
Some examples of contracted work I frequently see are:
D & A Testing: Carriers join a consortium believing the consortium knows what they are doing. This is not always the case. When a carrier has only one driver they must join a consortium as you cannot have a random D & A program with only one driver.
Keep in mind once a carrier joins a consotium the carrier is no longer evaluated on the number of drivers the carrier has tested, i.e. the carrier has 100 drivers and belongs to a consortium with 2,000 drivers. The 50% for random drugs and 10% for random alcohol is based on the 2,000 not the 100.
Carriers should receive a semi-annual report for the consortium, not their company.
Many consortiums pull what I call a bait and switch. The consortium selects drivers for random testing. However, no one monitors the pool to see how many drivers were acually TESTED.
It's not uncommon for these consortiums to fail to randomly TEST the required number of drivers randomly for drugs and alcohol.
Maintenance: Carriers often use outside facilities to have their trucks repaired. Unfortunately the carrier fails to impliment a quality assurance program and later discoveres the work performed was not as charged. Recently a carrier was cited in June 2005 for a brake being non-operational with less than 1/4" brake shoe. The carrier has a receipt for the trailer indicating that they were charged for a brake job and eight brake shoes for the same trailer cited for non-opearional and less than 1/4" brake shoe. Apparently the mechanic got distracted during the process and forgot to repair one brake. To top it off none of the drivers that pulled the trailer for the following six months noticed the brake shoe setting about an 1/2" away from the brake drum.
Safety Consultants: Not all consultants are created equal. Shop carefully and don't be affraid to ask for references. Ask the references if there were violations discovered during compliance reviews the consultant indicated were OK.
Recently a HM motor carrier paid $1,800 for a security analysis of their company and had a HM Security Plan drafted IAW 172.800. The carrier was cited for failing to follow their security plan. Apparently no one at the carrier bothered to read and impliment the strategies outlined in the security plan.
I've never heard of a consutant paying a portion of the penalties associated with a review.
So be deligent in selecting service providers and always review the work performed. Don't be afraid to call the local FMCSA office and ask questions, that's what they're there for.
You can locate your local FMCSA office by visiting the FMCSA's web site at www.fmcsa.dot.gov
Be safe.
Carriers often hire consultants to avoid having to do the work in house.
Some examples of contracted work I frequently see are:
D & A Testing: Carriers join a consortium believing the consortium knows what they are doing. This is not always the case. When a carrier has only one driver they must join a consortium as you cannot have a random D & A program with only one driver.
Keep in mind once a carrier joins a consotium the carrier is no longer evaluated on the number of drivers the carrier has tested, i.e. the carrier has 100 drivers and belongs to a consortium with 2,000 drivers. The 50% for random drugs and 10% for random alcohol is based on the 2,000 not the 100.
Carriers should receive a semi-annual report for the consortium, not their company.
Many consortiums pull what I call a bait and switch. The consortium selects drivers for random testing. However, no one monitors the pool to see how many drivers were acually TESTED.
It's not uncommon for these consortiums to fail to randomly TEST the required number of drivers randomly for drugs and alcohol.
Maintenance: Carriers often use outside facilities to have their trucks repaired. Unfortunately the carrier fails to impliment a quality assurance program and later discoveres the work performed was not as charged. Recently a carrier was cited in June 2005 for a brake being non-operational with less than 1/4" brake shoe. The carrier has a receipt for the trailer indicating that they were charged for a brake job and eight brake shoes for the same trailer cited for non-opearional and less than 1/4" brake shoe. Apparently the mechanic got distracted during the process and forgot to repair one brake. To top it off none of the drivers that pulled the trailer for the following six months noticed the brake shoe setting about an 1/2" away from the brake drum.
Safety Consultants: Not all consultants are created equal. Shop carefully and don't be affraid to ask for references. Ask the references if there were violations discovered during compliance reviews the consultant indicated were OK.
Recently a HM motor carrier paid $1,800 for a security analysis of their company and had a HM Security Plan drafted IAW 172.800. The carrier was cited for failing to follow their security plan. Apparently no one at the carrier bothered to read and impliment the strategies outlined in the security plan.
I've never heard of a consutant paying a portion of the penalties associated with a review.
So be deligent in selecting service providers and always review the work performed. Don't be afraid to call the local FMCSA office and ask questions, that's what they're there for.
You can locate your local FMCSA office by visiting the FMCSA's web site at www.fmcsa.dot.gov
Be safe.