Second to that — and more pressed by comments by industry trade groups like the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association and the American Trucking Associations — was the need for accountability of shippers and receivers who can cause or push drivers to violate federal safety laws.
The comment period on the proposed rule ended Aug. 11.
As noted in prior coverage of public comments leading up to the Aug. 11 deadline, the burden of proof of coercion will be placed on the driver making the claim, which was a point of contention with several commenters.
ATA in its formal comments also says the agency needs to better define “coercion” as it’s used in the rule and the protocol that will be used to bring and determine claims from drivers of coercion.
Without a clear definition, drivers will be able to abuse the rule’s intended protections, ATA says in its comments.
Likewise, it is a point of contention with OOIDA, who also takes issue with what it calls an unclear and overly narrow definition of coercion itself. ATA suggests FMCSA include a requirement in the rule that drivers make a written objection at the time of the incident that includes what regulations would be violated if they proceeded to drive.
