According to a report in today’s Toronto Sun, one of the ‘street racers’ who caused the wreck that resulted in the death of professional driver David Virgoe was caught violating his bail conditions by operating a vehicle. (I use the term 'racers' loosely - to refer to them as racers actually does a disservice to those who participate in the sport of racing responsibly in a controlled evironment).

I don’t think I even need to give Virgoe’s back story any more – his name is synonymous with professionalism and heroism after he steered his truck into the ditch along Hwy. 400 a couple summers ago to avoid hitting other motorists as two young drivers engaged in street racing.

The bail violation will cost Prabhjit Multani’s parents $60,000 of the $80K they posted for his bail – and he’ll have to pay the rest when he’s able. Apparently the police were keeping an eye on him, so when he hopped into his parent’s van and took it for a spin, they were able to quickly pounce and enforce his bail conditions. While it’s disheartening that 22-year-old Multani showed such blatant disregard for Canada’s legal system, it’s nice to see the police were monitoring the kid and didn’t hesitate to nail him when he breached the terms of his bail.

The Sun article explained that Multani received a 21-month jail sentence as well as a 10-year driving ban. It also says Justice of the Peace Linda Kay warned him: "If you breach any of these conditions, your parents will lose that money."

Yet he did it anyways – he made the decision to risk it all and drive. His parents are, by all accounts, hard-working immigrants who likely put up a good part of their life savings for their son’s bail in good faith. And now it’s gone. While you can’t help but feel for them, if this kid has any decency he’ll pay them back every cent over time. And there’s no sympathy owed to the younger Multani – none whatsoever.

Permalink | Comments (2)

At first when I was asked if I would write a blog here, I was elated. As a colleague of ours in this business told me the other day, "IT'S ABOUT TIME EVERYONE LISTENED TO THE AGE OF EXPERIENCE". I thought about it, and finally the light bulb went off in my own mind as well.

As we train the drivers, and continually, train and retain them, what are we doing. Recently a company had an O/O ( I Know another acronym) leave work and we are not sure if he will return for MEDICAL REASONS. We as a company have pushed every driver especially the O/Os to have their own disability Insurance. I know they all claim they don't need it. It is a waste of money, Another expense, and of course the list goes on. They can't afford it, They have it (GET PROOF). However this particular driver, is at that precarious age where, he may not get his license renewed due to medical reasons.

This is all he has done since coming to Canada DRIVE A TRUCK. Now he is out of work, may not work again, has to provide his employer with a Medical certificate that he is MEDICALLY FIT TO DRIVE, before they let him behind the wheel pullling their equipment again. Funny thing is, he was the last person, this company had to sign up as an O/O for his own Disability Insurance. He is/was indestructable. He is/was, always saying I have coverage with my VISA card, or some other such excuse. The company argued with him and he argued back. Obviously to no avail. Luckily for this driver he owns his truck. He won't loose it. HOWEVER

He now has no income, has to provide a MEDICAL RELEASE, before his employer can let him drive again, and of course this all adds up to DUE DILIGENCE. As a company, we all are aware of such companies as NAL and Roadside EDGE to name a few. They have good packages for the drivers, and at a reasonable cost. We all have to negotiate the best and try to present the package for the drivers as possible

AS MANAGERS, OWNERS, AND RESPONSIBLE EMPLOYERS, IT IS INCUMBENT ON US TO ENSURE EVERY DRIVER HAS SUFFICIENT MEIDCAL COVERAGE AND DISABILITY INSURANCE, SO THEY DO NOT PUT THEMSELVES THEIR FAMILY OR THE COMPANY IN HARMS WAY, THEY HAVE SUFFICIENT DISABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE TO MAKE TRUCK PAYMENTS IF THEY ARE DISABLED, AND OF COUSRE AS A RESPONSIBLE EMPLOYER, YOU ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS HAVE AN EMERGENCY CONTACT NUMBER AND NAME IN CASE OF ACCIDENT ILLNESS, OR INJURY,

Please as responsible employers, due your utmost to ensure everyone driving for you, IS COVERED. THAT I GUESS IS PART OF THE AGE OF WISDOM SPEAKING. NONE OF US IS INDESTRUCTABLE

Permalink | Comments (5)

Back in 2001, Jim Collins wrote one of the most popular business books of all time, Good to Great - - why some companies make the leap and others don’t. Mr. Collins has written a new book that is sure to be another top seller entitled “How The Mighty Fall and Why Some Companies Never Give In.”

Since this is such a difficult time for so many trucking companies, and companies in other industries, I thought it would be interesting to look at some of themes that are highlighted in the book and relate them to examples that I have witnessed in the trucking industry. In the book, Mr. Collins outlines the “Five Stages of Decline.” One of the important messages is that a company “can be well into Stage 3 decline and still look and feel great, yet be on the cusp of a huge fall. Decline can sneak up on you and - - seemingly all of a sudden - - you can be in big trouble.”

However, “with a road map to decline in hand . . . (trucking companies) . . . heading . . . downhill might be able to apply the brakes early and reverse course.” Some companies in his study came “back even stronger - - after having crashed into the depths of Stage 4”. . . . Mr. Collins’ research indicates “that organizational decline is largely self-inflicted, and recovery largely within our own control. So long as you never fall all the way to Stage 5, you can rebuild.”

Very briefly here are the 5 Stages of Decline.

Stage 1: Hubris Born of Success

In stage 1, Mr. Collins asserts that some companies become arrogant and lose sight of the underlying factors that created success in the first place. Since luck and timing can often play a role in success, some companies tend to overestimate their own merit and capabilities and succumb to hubris. He expresses the view that strong leaders maintain their fear of failure and their discipline, even as their companies achieve success.

Stage 2: Undisciplined Pursuit of More

Hubris leads to an undisciplined pursuit of more - - more scale, more growth, more of whatever those in powers see as “success.” This has been quite evident in the trucking industry. There have been numerous examples of LTL service expansion in areas where the carrier had limited freight density. Both LTL and truckload carriers have been guilty of growth through aggressive pricing while drifting away from the pricing discipline that was a key to profits and growth through expansion into services and markets (e.g. flatbed, reefer) for which the company has no core competence.

Overreaching, making discontinuous leaps into areas that are inconsistent with core values is undisciplined. Addiction to scale is undisciplined. Leaping into new areas without one’s core competence is neglected in undisciplined.

Stage 3: Denial of Risk and Failure

In Stage 3, leaders begin receiving warning signs but discount them as “temporary,” “cyclic,” or “not that bad.” They discount the negative news while blaming external sources for their setbacks. “When those in power begin to imperil the enterprise by taking outsize risks and acting in a way that denies the consequences of those risks, they are headed straight for Stage 4.”

Stage 4: Grasping for Salvation

The consequences of drifting from Stages 1 through 3 are a sharp decline that is visible to all. Declining margins, customer erosion, employee defections can all be signs of a company in turmoil. Leaders who find themselves in these situations have two fundamental choices. They can lurch for a quick salvation or they can go back to the disciplined approach that brought about greatness in the first place. By grasping about in fearful, frantic reaction, late Stage 4 companies accelerate their own demise.

Stage 5: Capitulation to Irrelevance or Death

In Stage 5, the accumulated setbacks and misguided false starts erode financial strength and individual spirit to such an extent that leaders abandon all hope of building a great future. Mr. Collins argues that good leaders keep the faith and focus on a cause larger than survival and larger than themselves. They maintain the determination and discipline to take those actions, no matter how “excruciating”, to preserve the viability of the enterprise.

It is all about Leadership

The book looks at leadership and team behaviour on the way down and on the way up. In essence the message to business leaders is to remain humble, disciplined and fact-based. Leaders should challenge their team members to come forward with ideas and to engage in a constructive debate on the key drivers of the company. Every member of the team should accept some responsibility for poor results rather than engage in extensive finger-pointing. Clearly there are some valuable lessons in this very timely book that can help business leaders keep their companies on top and prevent them descending into a downward spiral.

Permalink | Comments (0)

I thought I was done writing about speed limiters for a while, but editorial director Lou Smyrlis’ latest blog and its responses have compelled me to address the issue once again. Based on the phone calls and e-mails I’ve received in recent weeks, it appears hard enforcement of Ontario’s speed limiter law has fanned the flames and sent the law’s critics into an uproar.

It seems everyone is still determined to beat the system. Some drivers are carrying waivers and asking MTO inspectors to take responsibility for any damage that occurs to the ECM during inspection. The result: A fine. Others are sealing off the plug-in slot, warning that whoever breaks the seal is responsible for damage. The result: A fine. I’ve been told some are even – and I hope this isn’t true – jury-rigging the plug-in slot so it delivers an electrical surge that can destroy the inspector’s reader. Not only is this dangerous, but the result: Most definitely a fine. See a pattern?

You can try every trick in the book to deter inspection officers from enforcing this law, but the end result is that you’re still going to get a fine. Can you afford it? Or would it be more reasonable to comply and adapt and move on?

Hey, I’m not telling you how to run your business – but isn’t it time to ask yourself that question? Also, is it really fair to be challenging the inspection officers who in most cases are just out there doing their jobs – just like you? This law has been dumped into their laps and I’m sure many of them would prefer not to have one more thing to worry about. Don’t direct your anger at the inspection officers.

‘No problem there,’ you say, ‘my anger is directed squarely at the Ontario Trucking Association, which dreamt up this harebrained scheme in the first place.’ Listen, I don’t like Bill 41 any more than any of you and I think the time and resources that were spent developing and endorsing this policy over the past five years could’ve been better spent. But having said that, is the OTA really to blame?

Consider this: The sole purpose of the OTA is to represent its members. Those members, for the most part, wanted to mechanically limit truck speeds in the province to 105 km/h. You can question their motives – was it really done with safety and the environment in mind, or for competitive reasons? I have my own opinion on that. But what you can’t question is that the OTA has done a remarkable job at representing its members’ interests and guiding this law through all the legislative hurdles. Who really thought it stood a chance when the OTA first announced its intentions in November, 2005? Not me.

Regardless of what you think about the OTA, it’s a successful, powerful and well-run lobby group that gets things done on behalf of its members. And as far as I know, it’s not an exclusive club. If you run a trucking company – big or small – I doubt very much that the OTA would refuse your membership dues. Would your opinions carry as much weight around the boardroom table as those of the bigger fleets that play a more active role in the association? Maybe not, but at least you would be heard. At least you’d be part of the process. I’m tired of the argument that the OTA represents only mega-fleets and has an agenda to beat down the little guys.

Now if you still want to be angry about Bill 41, then by all means, go right ahead. I don’t blame you. But at least direct your anger where it’s deserved: Queens’ Park. The Liberal government should take 100% of the blame for ushering in this law without first arming itself with all the information, namely the Transport Canada studies that were not long from being released when the law was passed.

It’s worth noting that between 2005 and 2009, Elections Ontario financial records show these same Liberals received over $30,000 in donations from the OTA. I’m not suggesting the Liberals were “bought” – I’m sure $30K is a drop in the bucket for the Ontario Liberals. But was it enough to grease the wheels? It does raise some interesting questions, especially considering the law seemingly went through the entire legislative process pretty much untouched by our entrusted lawmakers.

Frank Klees, a pretty clever Conservative MPP who was opposed to the speed limiter law, read the following during the debate in the Legislature: “I received an e-mail that, quite frankly, concerned me as a member of this Legislature and as a former minister...I'd like you to listen to this, Speaker, because you will be interested, as will any other member of this Legislature, to know the arrogance with which some stakeholders approach this place: ‘As for the amendments, we have none, and in fact I would go further and say that we would be very strongly opposed to any amendment. This is our bill. Every period, every comma, every semicolon was put there by us, and we would be very, very unhappy were it to be amended in any way’."

If he was referring to the OTA, then good on ’em. As a lobby group, they managed to draft a policy and then guide it through the legislative obstacle course right through to fruition, virtually untouched. That’s a pretty remarkable accomplishment and I have nothing but respect for the OTA for getting it done. Score one for OTA - who wouldn’t want an organization like that in their corner?

But the bottom line is, it never should’ve happened that way, yet the Liberals allowed it to happen. They didn’t do their due diligence. They didn’t arm themselves with all the facts. They didn’t give speed limiter opponents the opportunity to properly prepare and state their cases. I was at the so-called public hearings and they were a farce. OOIDA had 10 minutes to explain its position. Some of the Liberals on the committee tapped away at their Blackberries during the hearings. They were disinterested in the proceedings – their minds were made up. Transport Minister Jim Bradley and his underlings were little more than puppets on a string and if you believe the anti-speed limiter rhetoric, then it would be fair to say that they got thoroughly bamboozled.

So what can you do? Vote. You’ll have to wait til 2011 to do so, but that’s the best course of action. Don’t harass MTO inspection officers. Don’t dig your heels in and vow to fight every ticket unless you can afford to pay hundreds, maybe thousands of dollars in fines. And don’t blame the OTA. If you want revenge, then vote in the next provincial election. There’s a perception out there that truckers don’t vote – prove them wrong. Be heard.

But even then, don’t expect Bill 41 to be undone. It’s been speculated lately that the Conservatives, if elected, would overturn Bill 41 or 'order a review' (as if that wording itself isn’t a cop-out). If you haven’t guessed, in the interest of full disclosure, I’m a card-carrying Conservative. Yet, if elected, I wouldn’t expect the Conservatives to make overturning Bill 41 a priority. First, they’d have to win the election and they’ll be hard-pressed to do so in Ontario. Next, they’d have to risk alienating the public by reversing a law that on the surface, let’s face it, slows big trucks down. You really think that’s going to happen? Not likely. Many of you vow to fight this law to the end and I wish you luck.

However, you may save yourself a lot of aggravation by simply laying down your sword and adapting to the new reality. Professional drivers have proven their resilience over the years - life will go on in a speed limited world. But keep that sword handy, because in 2011 you’ll have your chance to wield it once more, and take aim at the appropriate target.

Permalink | Comments (14)

During this year’s Private Motor Truck Council of Canada conference, Roy Craigen of Transcom Fleet Services gave a presentation on Empowering for Productivity. I think all of us in attendance felt somewhat empowered by his presentation, and chatting with a friend afterwards we agreed that the trucking industry would be much better off if there were more Roy Craigens around.

Despite the fact he’s a Roughriders fan (Go Stamps!), I consider Roy a real pal and I think most people who’ve met him would proudly refer to him as a friend. He’s one of the most genuine people-oriented guys that I know. I one time met him for coffee at a Tim Horton’s as he was passing through my neck of the woods. It was a Sunday morning in the summertime when most young’ens would rather be doing something other than schlepping at Timmy’s for near minimum wage.

When the girl behind the counter poured us our coffees with a smile, Roy said “Thanks for coming in today, we really appreciate what you do.” He said it without a hint of sarcasm, but she shot him a suspect glance. Chances are her supervisor had never taken the time to thank her for coming in on a beautiful Sunday morning and doing her job with a smile. Why was this stranger taking the time to acknowledge her for a job well done? Chances are it made a lasting impression. And that’s just Roy.

During his presentation, Roy asked the question: Why do we invest more in our equipment than in our people? A new tractor gets the following: A building; top of the line diagnostics equipment/computers; regularly-scheduled maintenance; and 24-hour assistance when required – all for an asset with a five-year life expectancy.

A professional driver on the other hand, receives: Access to a driver’s room; vending machines; and bulletin boards for communications – and the driver has 30 years of productivity potential. And yet pretty much any fleet manager says drivers are the company’s greatest asset – but where’s the evidence of that?

“That is not a very good support mechanism,” Roy pointed out, especially when the driver controls pretty much every big ticket item within a fleet: fuel, maintenance, customer service, image, insurance costs, etc. to name but a few. Roy urged fleet managers to think of a professional driver, not as a trucker, but as the manager of a mobile profit centre – they control every expense! And yet they are so often evaluated and beaten down, even by so-called “reward systems” that are frequently based on punishment.

“It hardly inspires,” he said. “If I lost my bonus in January, what does that do to me the other 11 and a half months I’m going to be driving your equipment?”

Here are a few more suggestions from Roy: Make driver orientation an event in which to showcase your organization. Become a tough line-up to crack. Drivers should leave an interview or orientation session asking ‘I wonder if I can measure up to these guys?’ Celebrate accomplishments (ie. becoming a Canadian citizen). Allow drivers to evaluate the company (“We have an army of people that get out of bed every day to assess drivers, let them evaluate us.”) Make sure your operations employees and dispatchers actually like drivers! “We’ll hire someone who can type 70-80 words per minute only to find out many months in, that they don’t like truck drivers!”

I can’t possibly do justice to Roy’s presentation in a single blog entry, but if you ever get the chance to hear him speak, take advantage of it. Your drivers will thank you for it.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Shunters don't get enough respect in my opinion, and it's probably the most important position in the supply chain of a busy hub or distribution centre. And, too often, it's the rookies that get “shunted” into hydraulics with little or no experience.

This is called Baptism by Fire, and it's a reasonable strategy. But it's a good thing those trucks are tough or they'd implode with some of the abuses foisted on them. Purolator has some Capacitys almost ten years old that work a regular shift. And I've heard of other companies running shunt trucks 6,000 hours a year—that's 20 hours per day! Really, if the engine doesn't die, a shunt truck can live a long and prosperous life, as can the driver.

But difficulties can arise that are challenging to even experienced drivers, i.e like running under the king pin, and getting out from behind that king pin, spinning in the snow.

So the theory is that these neophyte drivers will earn their stripes on the battlefield. This is literally true because they're flying solo with each drop and hook. But you've got to come away from a shift at a frenetically-paced yard with some degree of self-esteem having given your all to make the night work out right, trailers in the doors at precisely the right time, and the yard set up square and tight.

Some of those newbies end up liking the job; I know drivers who have started as shunters and have done nothing else since....and other drivers who choose shunting as a vocation because they like the precision, the pace, the predictable hours, and they particularly don't want to go on the road and fight with traffic, unless it's running to Tim's for coffees for the other drivers. There is some measure of control in shunting, and satisfaction when things go right.

So here's to the professional shunters, who've driven those mules backwards more miles than any of us could imagine. I'm not saying don't start the rookies off shunting, just keep them out of the way for the first few weeks. It's a great way to learn how to drive truck, but that shouldn't diminish our appreciation of great shunters and the job they do daily. A good shunter is on top of moves before they happen, aware of the location of the trailers in the yard, especially the “hot” ones, and what the brokers are doing. Watch a good shunter working, it's a treat.

Wouldn't it be a good idea to have a shunt competition some time? It could be sponsored by one or all of the shunt mfgs. Get out some plastic cones and plot some patterns that get progressively more difficult. Some shunt men (and women) are absolute wizards in spotting trailers. I'd include side door docks (rarely seen these days, but we actually practised this stuff when I got my licence last century at George Brown College, down by the ports off Cherry Street)..

Heck, a shunt competition could be a lot of fun. Various categories including accuracy trials, time trials, yard set up trials, obstacle course etc....I was talking about this with John Uppington of Ottawa and he agreed this would be a good idea. Maybe next year.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Think the debate over speed limiters in Ontario is over now that the province is enforcing the regulation? Think again.

In her latest editorial “Civil Libertarians? Darn tootin' I am” in the upcoming issue of Truck News, Joanne Ritchie, head of the Owner-Operators Business Association, comes out swinging over certain remarks Ontario Trucking Association vice president Doug Switzer made recently regarding lingering opposition to the law.

Ritchie takes great offense at Switzer’s characterization of those opposed to speed limiters as “civil libertarians” similar to those who fought seatbelt and motorcycle helmet laws. And she then proceeds to tear a strip off Switzer and the OTA for their dismissive stance and support of speed limiters and the Ontario government for buying into OTA’s arguments.

All fine and good – nothing wrong with a good debate and Ritchie is an experienced debater. It’s part of the reason we run her column in Truck News, even if some of us don’t always agree with what she has to say. And any law passed can still be changed if proven to be ineffective.

Problem is that just as Ritchie wraps herself up in the civil libertarian cloth, she decides to take more than a few liberties of her own. I would like to address one in particular in this blog because I have evidence which I trust and which shows a completely different reality.

Ritchie takes Switzer to task for telling the media that it’s primarily “independent driver-owners” who oppose this law. “Nothing could be farther from the truth,” Ritchie writes. “MOST of the trucking industry – single-truck owners and fleets large and small – including many who already govern their trucks, find this kind of purposeless government meddling odious.”

Really Joanne? Where’s the evidence? What independent survey do you have that proves most Ontario carriers don’t support speed limiters?

Truth is, far as I know, we are the only ones who have been conducting truly independent surveys of fleet managers and executives as well as owner/operators on this topic for three years now. And this is what our latest survey (completed just this week) shows:

• 72% of for-hire fleet managers in Ontario support speed limiters compared to 28% who do not;
• 58% of private fleet managers in Ontario support speed limiters compared to 42% who do not;
• 74% of government fleet managers in Ontario support speed limiters compared to 26% who do not

These numbers are consistent with what our surveys have been showing the last three years: namely that although support among Ontario fleets is not complete, the majority of fleet managers and owners DO support speed limiters. The only area where it’s somewhat close is the private fleet sector and yet even there speed limiters have almost 60% support.

And the research also shows that although the distaste among owner/operators is very strong (80% oppose speed limiters) it also is not complete, contrary to what OBAC has been saying all along. One fifth (20%) of the owner/operators in Ontario responding to our survey support speed limiters.

Speaking as I am of numbers, it brings me to one final question I would like answered. A question that begs asking really and yet, curiously enough, no one seems to ask: OBAC presents itself as the voice of the owner/operator. Certainly government accepts it as such and Ritchie is certainly a vocal supporter of issues she perceives to be of interest to owner/operators. But exactly how many of the about 35,000 owner/operators in Canada are members of OBAC? An association speaking on behalf of owner/operators should not hesitate to answer such a question to ensure the industry and government it is not taking liberties with the information it puts out.

Permalink | Comments (33)

I must admit, I did a double take when I looked at the latest Class 8 sales numbers for Canada. The fact that the blood bath that started last year really continued in May did not surprise me. (May’s figures published at the start of this month are the latest numbers available from the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers Association) I was expecting another month of horrible sales. I was just not ready for the drop those numbers showed and what it signified for the rest of the year.

There were just 1,078 Class 8 trucks sold in Canada in May, which was by far the lowest
May sales tally for the past decade. It was also about 1,800 units off the 5-year average. (It should be noted that five year average includes the industry’s peak years of 2004 to 2006.) April’s sales of just 1,197 also marked the lowest April sales in a decade.

This year’s truck sales definitely started off with a whimper. In fact, the first quarter of 2009 proved to be the quietest first quarter in terms of sales of the past decade, coming in about 100 units below the 2002 total. Just three months into this financially challenging year and sales were more than 2,000 off last year’s YTD pace, hardly a banner year in itself, about 3,000 off the 5-year YTD average and about 5,000 off the banner year of 2006,

So now with truck sales hitting such lows in both April and May, any chance of a pickup this summer is nothing more than a dream. The second quarter is a washout and I doubt the third quarter will be much better. Sales have not hit the 2,000 unit mark since October of last year, despite the fact this was supposed to be a pre-buy year.

With just 5,953 Class 8 trucks sold year-to-date, 2009 is ranking as the worst sales year of the past decade by a considerable margin.

Wish I had better news.

Permalink | Comments (2)

Drivers are the same as you and I. Any R.O.I. is worth it to them.

At our company we heard so many complaints from dispatch about drivers and vice versa something had to be done. We had the Operations Supervisor talk with the dispatchers, and some of the drivers, and told them 'GIVE ME SOMETHING TO PRESENT TO THE DRIVERS AND WE WILL RE-EDUCATE THEM. However it has to come from Dispatch not Owners and Management.

You see, if Owners and Management are always telling, it does not have the same impact. When it comes from one of the dispatchers, it has a bigger impact. Especially when the dispatcher in question was appointed by his/her fellow dispatchers to do the presentation. Pride in their accomplishment Pride in the presentation, Driver feedback great, Insurance company sat in on a few sessions, (they learnt and found it beneficial). We can't buy this type of positive impact.

Now we start our next project, train the dispatchers. Our same Operations Superviosr who did such a fantastic job on this will now be requested, to meet with many of the drivers, and see what their complaints, wants, needs, requirements are, and train the dispatchers the same way. Maybe even get one of the drivers to present it. Give them an afternoon with pay and let them tell the dispatchers what their problems on the road, customs, driving, fuelling, H.O.S. etc. are.

This way everyone is involved everyone makes a contribution, everyone feels like they have accomplished something, and MORE IMPORTANTLY IT HAS NOT REALLY COME FROM MANAGEMENT IT CAME FROM THE FRONT LINES. The real point is, we train and retrain everyone, not just the drivers. Everyone needs to be aware of expectations, and what can or cannot be done.

HERE ARE THE ACRONYMS FOR THE WEEK 1) R.O.I. 2) F.T.L 3) C.O.D. 4) B.T.S. Honestly if someone wants to ship under #3 I would be very leery of accepting the load, even Certified Cheques can bounce you know!

Permalink | Comments (0)

Enforcement of Ontario and Quebec’s speed limiter laws took full effect July 1 and enforcement officers in Ontario didn’t hesitate to fine drivers who didn’t have their engines locked in at 105 km/h or less.

However, the tool the MTO is using to detect whether or not a vehicle complies with the law has raised some questions. As pictured on the cover of the July issue of Truck News, the MTO is using an Ez-Tap, read-only device to plug into the engine’s ECM and determine whether or not the speed limiter is set at 105 or less.

The device, however, does not display other parameters such as tire size and gear ratios, which engine manufacturers admit can influence actual on-road speed. Naturally, this has not been lost on speed limiter opponents – most notably OBAC - who are questioning the validity of these enforcement tactics.

The MTO would likely require costly OEM software to read all the parameters that influence road speed. Not only is it costly, but it varies from engine manufacturer to engine manufacturer. To equip all scales or enforcement branches with every required version of OEM software would incur a considerable expense. Using the OEM software rather than a simple read-only device also opens the whole can of worms regarding the ability to change or corrupt ECM parameters and accessing additional information, raising questions of privacy rights.

It’s not clear where the MTO will go from here, whether they’ll acquire a more effective enforcement tool, invest in the OEM software or stick with the Ez-Tap device. However, owner/operators who are bent on fighting charges under Bill 41 may have a compelling case. Of course, it may be less time-consuming and costly to just get on with it and comply with the law.

As a side note, Quebec enforcement officers are apparently showing some more flexibility when it comes to enforcing that province’s version of the new law. Until July 31, they’ll offer drivers or owners of non-compliant trucks a seven day grace period to have their speed limiters locked in at 105.

- Enforcement officer Travis McMunn shows the Ez-Tap tool the MTO is using to measure compliance with Ontario's speed limiter law.

Permalink | Comments (7)

Life has gotten a lot smellier and messier lately for Toronto residents.

Not that we elicit any sympathy from the rest of the province or country, but you do have to feel a little bit for those of us who are suffering the ill effects of a city-wide garbage strike, and who are forced to haul stinking bags of waste to various temporary sites we would normally use for swimming and recreation.

Really, the sight of maggots squirming and oozing out of the food bins leaves nothing to be desired, but at this point I’d be willing to retrieve a few thousand dollars in taxes each year to dispose of the garbage myself, instead of paying someone nearly $30.00 an hour to take my garbage away and then toss my garbage bins mercilessly across the lawn.

My neighbour, who hand crushes his plastic water bottles into little flat disks, is already apoplectic at the waste and disorder.

Which brings me to the subject of plastic bags and the other reason some residents of Toronto are sorry for themselves.

(Believe me, there will be a link to transportation soon).

According to its official doctrine, the City of Toronto has a “goal of diverting 70% of waste from landfill”, and so, it plans to reduce the volume of plastic bags by making retailers charge customers five cents per plastic bag. This all began June 1.

On a normal day, I must carry at least four bags with me to the office: book bag, lunch bag, computer bag, and extra shoe bag.

But do you think I can remember to pack a couple of cloth carry out bags in my purse or jacket when heading to the store on an errand?

I often find myself stranded with at least $40 extra dollars of impulse or irresistible sale purchases, angry that I’m going to get gouged, (because that’s what this amounts to) for the cost of plastic bags.

I say that this is gouging because, while plastic bags are surely a large part of the problem, I think there are priority areas for “diverting waste from landfill” that municipalities like Toronto, or other businesses, could better concentrate on.

(First and foremost, get your staff back to work, so that piggish people don’t dump in rivers and ravines, and so that they are not forced to consolidate waste, because the temporary dumps are not accepting recyclables and organic waste.)

Packaging alone is a major area. I know that, to increase cube, it’s important to streamline and squeeze in as much as possible, but does toilet paper really need to be individually gift-wrapped?

And it’s a little insulting to listen to commercials for those triple-concentrated, overly perfumed, skin-stripping detergents that are in “smaller compact bottles” for the sake of the environment!

One of the most “tragic” outcomes of the bag debacle was when the LCBO stopped offering those super thick beige plastic bags at checkout.

This has led to some significant shrinkage, especially when clumsy people like myself, unused to the fragility of paper, leave a 12 year old bottle of Scotch (hostess gift) sitting precariously in its cheap brown paper bag, and it tips over and cracks, leaving a trail of booze and broken glass on the tiles.

Many Torontonians, like the obedient citizens they are, have already embraced those cute little designer cloth bags that state, quite unnecessarily I think, “This is not a plastic bag”, and that cost more than Samsonite luggage.

The cloth bags I own are a motley collection of now-grimy offerings from No Thrills, Wal-Mart, and various banks and charities. I own a few of those little mini bins too, only because they were offered free at one point, but they are pretty useless once you put more than two cartons of milk in them. They might stack nicely, and look good on Loblaws-poster-boy Galen Weston’s arm, stuffed with bunches of organic beets, but that’s about it.

If there’s one person happy using cloth bags, though, it’s definitely my mother. She’s been carrying cloth bags for years. You know the ones: with animal-patterned brocade and chintzy floral fabrics.

She quite fell in love with one of her cloth bags, which had a lively cat pattern and was lined in silk.

Fragile as it was, the lining soon ripped and my mom took it to the dry cleaners to have it repaired. She felt a bit odd getting a cloth bag all fixed up for the price of five new ones, so she shrugged her shoulders and told the cleaners “I’m a bit of a bag lady, I suppose.”

When she went to pick up the bag, the cleaners waved away payment and looked at her sympathetically.

“You BAG LADY, no charge!!”

Permalink | Comments (0)