Lafarge forcing their drivers to become road hazards

[iliketrout]

No issues with the trucks going 10 under...most probably do anyways when they're fully loaded.

My issue is with LaFarge encouraging or empowering their drivers to be Pace Cars, and deciding when to send video to LEO's for perceived violations.

I have to wonder if there will be drivers who take their new-found status as Deputies too seriously and spend more time policing and less time focusing on getting a load of concrete to its destination safely. Sounds like distracted driving to me which in my opinion is a much greater threat to public safety.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by JB_AOL

You guys are missing the most important part..



This is where it gets scary. Allowing someone else to "police" the speeders. What makes lafarge truck drivers any better than regular drivers. Nothing. I see them cutting people off, tailgating, and speeding. Who's gonna be calibrating the equipment?

Frankly I'm all for any (commercial over 10,000#) truck (not just lafarge) to be limited to 10km/hr below the speed limit. Takes alot longer to stop that much weight.

If the CEO of Lafarge truly cared about safety, he'd put GPS tracking on each truck and fine his own drivers, not be so worried about the general public. There will always be accidents, people make mistakes.. But he seems to think it's only us that makes them.

GPS units are already on the trucks since 2015 and the article didn't say they ARE turning over anything to the police but that the COULD - same as any dash cam in a private vehicle
Cat

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

GPA units are already on the trucks since 2015 and the article didn't say they ARE turning over anything to the police but that the COULD - same as any dash cam in a private vehicle
Cat

That doesn't justify the concept.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Newview01

That doesn't justify the concept.

What concept would that be?
The one where a company has their drivers limit to 10KPH under the limit- same as dozens of other trucking companies?
Or the fact that if the police asked if one of the company's trucks were on a certain road certain time of day , they would turn over the truck's data - the same as a person in a private vehicle would not if the driver witnessed a wreck?
Cat

[iliketrout]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

What concept would that be?
The one where a company has their drivers limit to 10KPH under the limit- same as dozens of other trucking companies?
Or the fact that if the police asked if one of the company's trucks were on a certain road certain time of day , they would turn over the truck's data - the same as a person in a private vehicle would not if the driver witnessed a wreck?
Cat

If police ask for video evidence of a wreck or something similar, that is one thing and LaFarge should comply. However, from the tone of the article I don't believe that is what they are saying. It sounds like LaFarge wants to volunteer videos if their drivers perceive a dangerous act. Since when is a concrete truck driver trained and competent in deciding if a driving action warrants police investigation?

Maybe they should just tell their drivers to focus their attention on their load and let the Police worry about Policing the other drivers.

[catnthehat]

Or maybe the news report got it wrong .
I didn't read it that way .
Pretty sure the police have better things to do than to continually go over perceived traffic violations submitted by companies or private operators
Cat

[iliketrout]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

.
Pretty sure the police have better things to do than to continually go over perceived traffic violations submitted by companies or private operators
Cat

Exactly my point. So let's not encourage companies to self-deputize and waste the time of those who are actually responsible for the enforcement of the traffic act.

[MrDave]

Lol. Speeders. The only way 10 km/hr under is dangerous, is if you are doing over the speed limit. I use my own personal ​vehicle the same way. My safety is based on my reaction time, my awareness of the traffic, and the road conditions. I can look after myself just fine, until one of you idiots come flying up my butt doing 40 to 60 km/hr over the limit.

Yes I automatically make complaints of dangerous drivers, and send in the video from the dashcam.
Wish some of you actually had liquid hauling experience. You can't strap liquid down , and a little move in the load changes everything.
As for lane splitting, go for it. More dead or crippled bikers will result. If the bikes are speeding in traffic, accidents will increase.

Take the time to research how accidents tend to get worse as speed increases. Also try stopping a loaded body job when a soccer mom hits the brakes at the lights. That 10 km/hr less starts to make sense, if you consider stopping distance, doesn't it? But you would rather be speeding than getting rear ended by a cement truck wouldn't you? That's the only thing you are looking at, your hurry.

[bsmitty27]

Originally Posted by MrDave

Lol. Speeders. The only way 10 km/hr under is dangerous, is if you are doing over the speed limit. I use my own personal ​vehicle the same way. My safety is based on my reaction time, my awareness of the traffic, and the road conditions. I can look after myself just fine, until one of you idiots come flying up my butt doing 40 to 60 km/hr over the limit.

Yes I automatically make complaints of dangerous drivers, and send in the video from the dashcam.
Wish some of you actually had liquid hauling experience. You can't strap liquid down , and a little move in the load changes everything.
As for lane splitting, go for it. More dead or crippled bikers will result. If the bikes are speeding in traffic, accidents will increase.

Take the time to research how accidents tend to get worse as speed increases. Also try stopping a loaded body job when a soccer mom hits the brakes at the lights. That 10 km/hr less starts to make sense, if you consider stopping distance, doesn't it? But you would rather be speeding than getting rear ended by a cement truck wouldn't you? That's the only thing you are looking at, your hurry.

X2 I think there are a few affliction and tapout shirts buried under camo in some closets 8-)
Brad

[the.tru.albertan]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

You are recorded almost every day
Lafarge is not sending your data at all , it hasn't been asked for but you can bet however that anybody with a dash cam or GoPro on their helmet would be asked for info in a big wreck , witnesses are asked for on a continual basis in the news, on the raido and on TV

Doesn't it say in the article that if you speed past a Lafarge truck that is equipped correctly, they will send your info in? The company is working traffic enforcement now?????????????? Doesn't matter about a camera or not during the aftermath of a big wreck. If you witness one, you pull over and render assistance and provide YOUR info on YOUR own terms to the investigators.

As far as lane filtering and driving like A road racer goes, a person could always move to where they are more comfortable driving - with all the other "experts"
Out there .
The worst bike fatalities I have ever seen were involving guys who felt they were expert riders and all were breaking the speed limit and or filtering in traffic .
I knew every one of them , too.
Cat

This is another typical Albertan pure emotional argument regarding the subject of filtering. The facts and data of numerous studies contradict your statement. It's safer than riding in the typical fashion.

[fargineyesore]

If Lafarge wants their trucks to run at 10k below the speed limit, I don't care.

BUT, they have no right to deliberately impede other traffic, that is just self-righteous BS.

If they start doing this, then watch the complaints about their drivers skyrocket.

Think all their drivers completely stop at all stop signs, think all their drivers signal at every turn, etc? I doubt that very much. Once other drivers start filming their transgressions, they'll change their tune very quick I'd think.

Only way they can really deliberately impede traffic is on a two lane road and if they line up side by side. You can't really call someone going 10K below the speed limit deliberately impeding traffic as there are all sorts of drivers that drive 10 below the speed limit.

If they try this BS with other drivers on the road, I believe it will come back to bite them.

[cardshark]

I've been speeding for 30 years and I've never got a ticket. Watch for cops and radar trucks and don't do double the speed limit in the city. Lafarge isn't going to change anything.

Some day self-driving cars will be forced on us and we won't be allowed to drive at all, so better enjoy speeding and driving while we can. They'll say it's for our safety but we all know the government wants to control us.

I hope Lafarge are punished for their social justice posturing. I'm happy to say that we've never used them.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by the.tru.albertan

Doesn't it say in the article that if you speed past a Lafarge truck that is equipped correctly, they will send your info in? The company is working traffic enforcement now?????????????? Doesn't matter about a camera or not during the aftermath of a big wreck. If you witness one, you pull over and render assistance and provide YOUR info on YOUR own terms to the investigators.



This is another typical Albertan pure emotional argument regarding the subject of filtering. The facts and data of numerous studies contradict your statement. It's safer than riding in the typical fashion.

No it doesn't , you need to learn to read properly instead of adding stuff in your head .
And no, it's a typical point of view from someone with years of motorcycle racing and road riding experience that obeys the rules of the road , drives and rides safely and knows the difference between two lanes and an imaginary third lane for motorcycles
Cat

[the.tru.albertan]

Originally Posted by liar

i have heard this many times and ask for a link to these " studies " that claim lane splitting is safer than following the rules of the road but no one ever answers . i would be interested to read if you can produce.

http://www.cycleworld.com/2015/06/02...s-rider-saftey

http://newatlas.com/motorcycle-lane-...esearch/34425/

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by cardshark

I've been speeding for 30 years and I've never got a ticket. Watch for cops and radar trucks and don't do double the speed limit in the city. Lafarge isn't going to change anything.

Some day self-driving cars will be forced on us and we won't be allowed to drive at all, so better enjoy speeding and driving while we can. They'll say it's for our safety but we all know the government wants to control us.

I hope Lafarge are punished for their social justice posturing. I'm happy to say that we've never used them.

Jumping to conclusions is about as bad as trying to beat the law of averages regarding speeding.

[the.tru.albertan]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

No it doesn't , you need to learn to read properly instead of adding stuff in your head .
And no, it's a typical point of view from someone with years of motorcycle racing and road riding experience that obeys the rules of the road , drives and rides safely and knows the difference between two lanes and an imaginary third lane for motorcycles
Cat

Straight from the article:

If someone speeds dangerously past a truck equipped like that, the data could be turned over to enforcement, he said. "Those are the sorts of things we would look at, yes. ... We've just started talking to the city and we'll see where it goes."

Sounds like they're turning your info over to cops to me Cat.

And it also sounds like you're not riding as safe as you could be. I'm not going to take advice from a fellow rider who continuously puts themselves in the crush zone. Sorry Cat, we are going to have to agree to disagree.

[JB_AOL]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Or maybe the news report got it wrong .
I didn't read it that way .
Pretty sure the police have better things to do than to continually go over perceived traffic violations submitted by companies or private operators
Cat

I read it the same as illiketrout. But yes, Wouldn't be the first time a reporter "reported wrong"

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Salavee

Maybe they should just haul 1/4 yd loads with a huge pick-up fleet and go to beat hell. Safer for everybody.

I'm sure LaFarge have it figured out what works best for them. Maybe they get a good discount from their Insurance Company. Whatever, I'm pretty sure it wont hurt anyone and there won't be any major traffic jams or other horrific traffic events because of it... unless some other driver pulls a stupid.

By the way you support their action it's almost like you were a part of their decision.

Here is what I'd like for you to tell me.

1. Was there a problem with lafarges drivers driving in an unsafe manner prior to this decision?
2. Was there a problem with cement trucks speeding around the province prior to this decision?
3. Will 10km under the posted limit create a safe condition under all circumstances?
4. Do you think that without this decision lafarges drives would feel it's best to speed on icy roads with a loaded truck?
5. Has society as a whole become so used to being told what to do, that without being told what to do they lack the common sense to make a decision on their own?
6. What gives lafarge, a privately owned company, with absolutely no government affiliation, the right to dictate what the legal speed limit should be, by sending out a fleet of cement trucks to act as "pace cars"?


PS, I welcome anyone who supports lafarges decision to answer my questions.

[Salavee]

"If someone speeds dangerously past a truck equipped like that, the data could be turned over to enforcement, he said. "Those are the sorts of things we would look at, yes. ... We've just started talking to the city and we'll see where it goes."

There is a big difference between could be and would be. Imagination and biased reporting at work again.

[JB_AOL]

Originally Posted by MrDave

Lol. Speeders. The only way 10 km/hr under is dangerous, is if you are doing over the speed limit..

Bought into the whole "speed kills" thing haven't you..

The problem isn't the speed differential, it's the entitled person not respecting or following rules. Oh, and by entitled, I mean EVERYONE, doesn't matter the generation. How many of you create a rolling roadblock in the left lane? Let me guess? no one..lol. How many people have pulled over to let people pass?

By allowing Lafarge (or anyone for that matter) to submit a complaint with evidence is going to bog down LEO and the court system even more. Now if cops ask for evidence, that's another thing.

Mr.dave, I agree with the rest of your post.

[KegRiver]

I read the news story and I don't see what all the excitement is about.

If you read what Lafarge really said it's clear the the reporter who wrote this story is doing what many here are trying to do, make a mountain out of a mole hill.

I know that people hear what they expect to hear and see what they expect to see, even when what they are seeing and hearing does not fit their personal expectations.
But this is exactly why we have an NDP government in Alberta and the Shiny Pony in Ottawa.

When will people wise up and start thinking for themselves instead of letting the media think for them!

No company wants to get involved in policing our streets and highways. What they want is to cover corporate buttocks.

Like many here, they want to appear pro law and order when in fact all they care about is the bottom line. They don't want to get sued, plain and simple.
That's what the GPS and the cameras are for. Nothing more.

As for the 10k under the limit, why would anyone care?
So you get home two whole minutes later, big deal. And that is only if you can not pass, and only if you are behind one of those trucks.

The way people drive these days there is about as much chance of that happening as there is of winning the lottery, if you never buy a ticket.

It sounds like you all going to die if the government, in it's infinite wisdom, decides that dropping all speed limits will cut our output of greenhouse gasses and save millions in accident costs?

That's a lot more likely to happen then it is for Lafarge drivers to want to become cops.

The sky really is falling, better run for cover.

[cardshark]

Originally Posted by Salavee

Jumping to conclusions is about as bad as trying to beat the law of averages regarding speeding.

I feel like I just got bit by a minnow. Big fish like me prefer to be above average than to cower in fear of the law of averages.

[the.tru.albertan]

Originally Posted by Salavee

"If someone speeds dangerously past a truck equipped like that, the data could be turned over to enforcement, he said. "Those are the sorts of things we would look at, yes. ... We've just started talking to the city and we'll see where it goes."

There is a big difference between could be and would be. Imagination and biased reporting at work again.

"Could be" turns into 'done' pretty quick. The fact that they are even considering this is mind boggling. Don't read into the wording too much... look into the intentions.

[Kurt505]

Nobody wants to answer my questions?

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by the.tru.albertan

"Could be" turns into 'done' pretty quick. The fact that they are even considering this is mind boggling. Don't read into the wording too much... look into the intentions.

Lafarge's intentions can only come from Lafarge. Has anyone heard directly from them?
A lot of conjecture on this subject and no facts to support any of them.

[the.tru.albertan]

Originally Posted by Salavee

Lafarge's intentions can only come from Lafarge. Has anyone heard directly from them?
A lot of conjecture on this subject and no facts to support any of them.

The article says Bruce Willmer, regional vice-president for Lafarge Canada stated those intentions.......

[solocam3]

A couple years ago when I was Coming back from Fort Mac Hot Shot at 8 in the morning the news radio just reported that "Highway 63 just claimed another two lives" !!! How can the road kill people? and being ticketed for not wearing a seat belt that saves lives! Why not give a ticket for not having headlights on that PREVENT the accidents that take lives? As was said, slow down and enjoy the trip. It might be your last!

[Kurt505]

I guess not.


I think the lack of common sense runs deeper than the brass at lafarge.

I'm not for cement trucks speeding around the province, but what I am 100% for is responsible drivers. It is totally safe for people to drive the speed limit under the right conditions, and to not do that is both dangerous and irresponsible.

The fact that some of you believe that it's ok for lafarge to take the law into their own hands blows me away.

What if co-op taxi figured they were going to send out their cabs as pace cars at 10km above the posted limit to get traffic flowing a bit quicker so they can get people to where they need to go quicker and save them some money, would that be ok? I mean it's only 10km above the limit...

[KegRiver]

I wonder if it's worth the effort, but I'll give it one last try.

From the news story, Lafarge was in a meeting with city officials when these statements were made. It seems there was concern among city officials regarding the fatality involving a Lafarge truck.

Of course Lafarge would in that situation, try to assuage concerns. That's to be expected.

So what did they really say? Well, they said, "we are looking at options", "we want to co-operate", "we are taking steps to make our activities safer."

That's what any company would do.

Anyone who has worked for such a company also knows it's all smoke and mirrors. Company officials seldom mean a word they say in such situations.

They'll do what is easiest and cheapest, download responsibility onto their drivers.

At no time, in the words quoted, did they say they would get involved in law enforcement, what they said was they, "might" co-operate with law enforcement. It follows and it's most likely that they would not, unless their hides were in jeopardy. In any other scenario they would point a finger at their drivers.

It blows me away that anyone could twist reality into 10k under the limit being dangerous.

We've been through this before.

Up till three years ago I operated snow plow trucks on the highway.
On that job we were required by the company and the government to not exceed 60kph. That's 40 under the posted limit.

40 under the posted limit, yet in 15 years of doing that job, there was not even one fatal accident involving a company snow plow truck, company wide.

How can that be, if 10k under the limit is so dangerous?

There can be only one answer. it's not the speed that makes the difference, it's the other drivers mental gymnastics that make the difference.

This country was founded by and developed by people who's only mode of transportation was foot mobile. Either their own, or a horse's.
This country prospered without the need for speed.

Today's decedents of those proud and resourceful settlers can not survive if they have to obey a simple traffic law. A simple reduction of 10k will bring about the end of the world.

I for one think that if that's all it takes it needs to happen.

[fargineyesore]

Now if they could get gravel trucks to slow down