Where Does Your COMPANY CSA Score Stand?

Boom!.....Brett drops the mic and walks off stage.....

Who was it that I got that from? Persian, was that you? I like that.

Lol yeah I think that was me, but I first used it for one of the Lobos reps who posted something... in response to you!

You quickly picked up the mic though and set them straight, and then promptly dropped it even harder.

Brett that only tells half the story.

Because companies are also getting shut down. Are SOME companies forcing drivers to drive HAZMAT , without an endorsement? SOME are. What about the shipper? Shouldn't they have checked? SOME do. Does a driver report defects, and the company says, "run with it, will fix it in the shop," thinking that it is not a "BIG DEAL." Answer is yes.

Some companies share they blame, because they either tolerate or encourage the behavior.

The good ones do the right thing, and encourage the right thing MOST of the time.

Dave

Are you saying that the quality of a company's drivers is not a reflection of the general quality of the company? That's silly. The companies that take best care of their drivers (pay, benefits, support) attract the best drivers and are able to be more selective in their hiring practices... leading to good csa scores. The other companies have to take what they can get and associated problems... leading to poor csa scores.

Are SOME companies forcing drivers to drive HAZMAT , without an endorsement? SOME are. .

No. It is the driver's right and responsibility to make sure the truck is safe and legal to drive. That includes both physical defects with the truck and improper endorsements and paperwork. In fact it's a Federal law that a driver can not be forced to drive if they deem anything to be unsafe or illegal. I'll quote some of these laws in a minute.

Does a driver report defects, and the company says, "run with it, will fix it in the shop," thinking that it is not a "BIG DEAL." Answer is yes.

Again, that's the driver's responsibility to know if the truck is safe to drive. Period. No matter what the company says, the decision and responsibility rests with the driver. I've been asked to do numerous things over the years that I refused to do. Either the truck or cargo was unsafe, the load couldn't be hauled legally, or the conditions were unsafe so I simply wouldn't do it until the problems were corrected.

A dispatcher looking at a computer screen doesn't know if there's a leak in your air hose, or if the storm coming is too severe to navigate through, or if your Hazmat endorsement has expired. It's the company's job to assign the freight and take care of any repairs that are needed. It's the driver's job to determine if everything is safe, legal, and ready to roll or inform the company of problems preventing the safe and legal operation of the vehicle.

FMCSA 392.7: Equipment, inspection and use

(a) No commercial motor vehicle shall be driven unless the driver is satisfied that the following parts and accessories are in good working order, nor shall any driver fail to use or make use of such parts and accessories when and as needed:

Service brakes, including trailer brake connections. Parking (hand) brake. Steering mechanism. Lighting devices and reflectors. Tires. Horn. Windshield wiper or wipers. Rear-vision mirror or mirrors. Coupling devices. Wheels and rims. Emergency equipment.

FMCSA 392.3: Ill or fatigued operator

No driver shall operate a commercial motor vehicle, and a motor carrier shall not require or permit a driver to operate a commercial motor vehicle, while the driver's ability or alertness is so impaired, or so likely to become impaired, through fatigue, illness, or any other cause, as to make it unsafe for him/her to begin or continue to operate the commercial motor vehicle. However, in a case of grave emergency where the hazard to occupants of the commercial motor vehicle or other users of the highway would be increased by compliance with this section, the driver may continue to operate the commercial motor vehicle to the nearest place at which that hazard is removed.

FMCSA 392.9: Inspection of cargo, cargo securement devices and systems

(a) General. A driver may not operate a commercial motor vehicle and a motor carrier may not require or permit a driver to operate a commercial motor vehicle unless—

(1) The commercial motor vehicle's cargo is properly distributed and adequately secured as specified in §§ 393.100 through 393.136 of this subchapter.

(2) The commercial motor vehicle's tailgate, tailboard, doors, tarpaulins, spare tire and other equipment used in its operation, and the means of fastening the commercial motor vehicle's cargo, are secured; and

(3) The commercial motor vehicle's cargo or any other object does not obscure the driver's view ahead or to the right or left sides (except for drivers of self-steer dollies), interfere with the free movement of his/her arms or legs, prevent his/her free and ready access to accessories required for emergencies, or prevent the free and ready exit of any person from the commercial motor vehicle's cab or driver's compartment.

(b) Drivers of trucks and truck tractors. Except as provided in paragraph (b)(4) of this section, the driver of a truck or truck tractor must—

(1) Assure himself/herself that the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section have been complied with before he/she drives that commercial motor vehicle;

(2) Inspect the cargo and the devices used to secure the cargo within the first 50 miles after beginning a trip and cause any adjustments to be made to the cargo or load securement devices as necessary, including adding more securement devices, to ensure that cargo cannot shift on or within, or fall from the commercial motor vehicle; and

(3) Reexamine the commercial motor vehicle's cargo and its load securement devices during the course of transportation and make any necessary adjustment to the cargo or load securement devices, including adding more securement devices, to ensure that cargo cannot shift on or within, or fall from, the commercial motor vehicle. Reexamination and any necessary adjustments must be made whenever

Are you saying that the quality of a company's drivers is not a reflection of the general quality of the company? That's silly. The companies that take best care of their drivers (pay, benefits, support) attract the best drivers and are able to be more selective in their hiring practices... leading to good csa scores. The other companies have to take what they can get and associated problems... leading to poor csa scores.

How do you account for companies that hire inexperienced drivers? Inexperienced drivers are going to get in more wrecks, they're going to fail to notice safety problems more frequently which causes failed inspections, and they're simply going to do a lot of things that are going to lower a company's CSA scores. No matter how well the company takes care of their inexperienced drivers, their CSA score is going to be lower than companies who hire more experienced drivers.

How do you account for companies that haul more extreme freight, like purely Hazmat companies and heavy haulers? They're going to have a greater number of more serious violations by the nature of the dangerous work they do even though they hire experienced drivers with good driving records. No matter how well they pay their drivers or how well they take care of them, if you're hauling extremely dangerous freight you're going to have more serious violations.

So when you read a company's CSA score can you figure out why it's low? The scores don't list the experience level of the drivers. They normally don't list the type of freight being hauled when the violation occurred.

The question in this conversation is this: Can you determine whether or not a company is a good place to work based on their CSA score?

I say no, you can't.

Every company I've ever worked for has had their share of horrible drivers. Some of them were plain reckless, others were simply incapable of handling a rig safely day in and day out for various reasons. So the company's CSA scores wouldn't have been very good, and yet I was driving a beautiful, safe, well-maintained rig getting tons of miles and making great money. It was an awesome place to work even though the overall quality of the drivers was below average at best.

The most important thing I'm trying to instill in people, especially the new drivers coming into this industry, is that it is both the right and the responsibility of the driver to determine whether or not the driver, the equipment, the paperwork, and the cargo is safe and legal to drive. Period. You can try to blame the companies or Mother Nature or God or bad luck or shippers or anyone you like but in the end it all comes down to the driver.

Now here is a helpful exercises we can do:

1) Explain to me your personal definition of a "bad company to work for"

2) Give me an example of your theory in practice. Give me the name of one company that you have determined is a bad company to work for and explain to me exactly how you've determined this from their CSA scores.

If you guys are right and you can use these scores to pin down a bad company to work for then this should be no problem.

....and for the record, anyone who has heard I don't allow people to disagree with me should note this conversation. So far only one or two people have partially agreed with some of what I've said. Otherwise everyone completely disagrees with me. I never have a problem with that, and in fact I thoroughly enjoy these debates because everyone learns a lot from them. If I start deleting comments it's because people start a personal attack against someone, starts calling names, and all that stuff. I would deem this to be a civilized debate and it's one I'm enjoying quite a bit actually, even though so far the voters have voted against me.

Interesting discussion and interesting website. I found the number of trucks/drivers per company interesting. I knew Swift was big, but I didn't know it was THAT big! Over 20,000 trucks and drivers! But I also saw that Roehl and Swift both had the explanation point but Prime and Knight did not. So...based on what ya'll have been saying, it sounds like a person would get inspected more driving for Swift than for Knight or Prime. Like I said, interesting.

If we are just talking about comparing "starter" companies (ones that employ high percentages of inexperienced drivers) then I concede brett's point. Most of the mega otr companies will all have the same basic problems Brett mentions that will lead to poor csa scores. But, if you're a good driver you can do allright at any of those companies. I'm not saying they are "bad" companies.

That said, comparing companies across all sectors of trucking, some companies are definitely better to work for than others. Such companies are more selective in who they hire and they have less problems (better csa scores). Does anyone doubt that driving for Walmart is a better job than driving for Swift, for example?

This is all probably irrelevant to most entry level drivers... But csa is something to consider when better opportunities are within reach (when you've got experience and want something better).

How and where do you go to find this score I would like to see what PAM TRANSPORT score is thank you

How and where do you go to find this score I would like to see what PAM TRANSPORT score is thank you

Go to the website below and type in the name. If you know the DOT number, that will narrow it down a bit.

BTW, Brett, I tried to link it, but it would not accept it.

SMS Search Page (CSA Scores)

Dave