Lafarge forcing their drivers to become road hazards

[Ken07AOVette]

I was driving a loaded mixer with a 5 and 4 down through the river valleys countless times a day for weeks on end, I had enough on my mind without worrying about holding up some Barbie on the way to Wal-mart or timmies. The boss said and I agree; 'watch the road in front of you let them watch your rear bumper'.

[masalma]

Everyone doing the same speed and keeping flow of traffic and distance according to safely stop is the safest way.

Was driving a 5 ton tandem truck with about 8 tons load on hw 16 on Thursday. John Deer tractor doing about 20 km/h on the right line and I am passing on left lane when the sedan in front of me decided to make a FULL stop on the highway to allow the cars behind the tractor to jump on the left lane, physically impossible for my truck to stop, slammed my brakes and swerved I stopped beside her on the shoulder. Without ABS and quick reaction she would have been crushed.

All I know when I have 20 tons rolling on the highway I need longer distance to stop and keep safe space and maintain flow of traffic for everyone's safety. It is a stupid idea on lafarge's end, probably some guy in a safety department that has never driven a truck and assumes that going slower is keeping everyone safe. In the city it is a different matter, going 10 below is not a big deal since you are only racing from one light to the next.

[Salavee]

Totally agree. Hi-way and City are two different driving environments.
Referring back to Lafarge, the largest percentage of their deliveries are in the City or surrounding higher traffic areas.

[bb356]

Originally Posted by Ken07AOVette

I was driving a loaded mixer with a 5 and 4 down through the river valleys countless times a day for weeks on end, I had enough on my mind without worrying about holding up some Barbie on the way to Wal-mart or timmies. The boss said and I agree; 'watch the road in front of you let them watch your rear bumper'.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by rem338win

So, how? A loader mixer isn't easy to maneuver and stop. Going 10 under isn't the end of the world and gives them a significantly lower braking distance.

Many companies have already started this. If the hammers on the road take more risks because the company isn't then I hope they get the Christmas tree behind them and a solid fine.

Pass them on the left and keep going.

They aren't setting the limit for "loaded trucks only", loaded or empty they are 10km under. If the trucks can't perform correctly at the legal posted speed then they should not be on the road in the first place. They aren't running 8ply motomaster tires with cheap Chinese brake pads. Lagarge is taking "site safety" to a whole new level and forcing it on the entire public.

If you can't drive a truck, don't drive a truck.

If your truck can't stop, get it off the road.

Has there been a spike in cement truck accidents lately for there to be a reason behind this decision? Or is it some brown nosing wannabe looking for brownie points?

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

They aren't setting the limit for "loaded trucks only", loaded or empty they are 10km under. If the trucks can't perform correctly at the legal posted speed then they should not be on the road in the first place. They aren't running 8ply motomaster tires with cheap Chinese brake pads. Lagarge is taking "site safety" to a whole new level and forcing it on the entire public.

If you can't drive a truck, don't drive a truck.

If your truck can't stop, get it off the road.

Has there been a spike in cement truck accidents lately for there to be a reason behind this decision? Or is it some brown nosing wannabe looking for brownie points?

Wow ! Road rage already ..and you're on the keyboard.

[JustMe]

Originally Posted by Salavee

Wow ! Road rage already ..and you're on the keyboard.

LOL. No kidding. From the outside looking in at this topic and the comments so far, looks like a lot of "the laws don't apply to me" crowd trying to justify speeding, conveniently forgetting the post speed limit is just that; the maximum speed, not the minimum. If folks just obeyed the law, this topic wouldn't even be worth discussing....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by JustMe

LOL. No kidding. From the outside looking in at this topic and the comments so far, looks like a lot of "the laws don't apply to me" crowd trying to justify speeding, conveniently forgetting the post speed limit is just that; the maximum speed, not the minimum. If folks just obeyed the law, this topic wouldn't even be worth discussing....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No it's about a group of people getting a mandate from their company to become potential road hazards. They posed the action for the trucks to act like "pace cars".

LC

[JustMe]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

No it's about a group of people getting a mandate from their company to become potential road hazards.



LC

How do? I think most of the trucks are used in an urban environment. Just how fast do folks have to drive in town on urban streets?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by JustMe

How do? I think most of the trucks are used in an urban environment. Just how fast do folks have to drive in town on urban streets?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How about the Henday? Residential is not where I see an issue. Did you read the entire article? Sorry but it is not up to any driver of a private or commercial vehicle to cause the flow of traffic to slow on purpose.

LC

[bb356]

This thread need's a pic !!!

[JustMe]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

How about the Henday?



LC

So, if folks obey the speed limit, how is someone doing 10 under a hazard? I drive the Henday daily and the posted speed isn't even treated a minimum by most drivers. I hold my original argument that if drivers obey the law and quit trying to justify breaking the law, the cement trucks doing 10 under will be no more of a hazard than the semi's doing 100 today are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by JustMe

So, if folks obey the speed limit, how is someone doing 10 under a hazard? I drive the Henday daily and the posted speed isn't even treated a minimum by most drivers. I hold my original argument that if drivers obey the law and quit trying to justify breaking the law, the cement trucks doing 10 under will be no more of a hazard than the semi's doing 100 today are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why should they take it upon themselves to act as "pace cars"? They should leave the policing to the police.

LC

[JustMe]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Why should they take it upon themselves to act as "pace cars"? They should leave the policing to the police.



LC

The catch phase today is Community Policing. That's exactly what they are doing, becoming involved in that exact philosophy, helping to police their community.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by JustMe

The catch phase today is Community Policing. That's exactly what they are doing, becoming involved in that exact philosophy, helping to police their community.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LOL....not their place to do so, where do you draw the line. Maybe motorcycle drivers should go 30 under, in the name of the children.

LC

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by JustMe

So, if folks obey the speed limit, how is someone doing 10 under a hazard? I drive the Henday daily and the posted speed isn't even treated a minimum by most drivers. I hold my original argument that if drivers obey the law and quit trying to justify breaking the law, the cement trucks doing 10 under will be no more of a hazard than the semi's doing 100 today are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Obviously this subject has been beat to death, but the reality is that if speeding were such a detriment to society, the punishment would reflect that. The cost of a speeding fine is set to allow for the filling of government coffers, but not so overbearing as to act as a deterrent to a large portion of the population.

This goes for most traffic violations. The government likes petty law breakers, trust me.

[JustMe]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

LOL....not their place to do so, where do you draw the line. Maybe motorcycle drivers should go 30 under, in the name of the children.



LC

But who says it's not their place? The police, city council etc or just folk that don't want anything impeding their speeding?

Maybe the police or council will be negative toward it, but I doubt it....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JustMe]

Originally Posted by Newview01

Obviously this subject has been beat to death, but the reality is that if speeding were such a detriment to society, the punishment would reflect that. The cost of a speeding fine is set to allow for the filling of government coffers, but not so overbearing as to act as a deterrent to a large portion of the population.



This goes for most traffic violations. The government likes petty law breakers, trust me.

To a degree I agree. There is very little traffic enforcement these days. But, seriously what real enforcement is there in any field? Police forces across the nation are vastly understaffed but no jurisdiction has the political will to raise taxes to relieve the shortage, so we get no enforcement to speak of. But we sure do get photo radar to shore up municipal coffers!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Newview01]

Maybe Lafarge's main interest is cutting fuel costs. 10 km/h on a fleet that size would be huge cost savings.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by JustMe

But who says it's not their place? The police, city council etc or just folk that don't want anything impeding their speeding?

Maybe the police or council will be negative toward it, but I doubt it....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Purposefully impeding the flow of traffic should be ticketable if it isn't already. Has nothing to do with speeding....has to do with maintaining safe flow of traffic. If they are governed to under the maximum speed limit...they should never occupy the left lane.

LC

[JustMe]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Purposefully impeding the flow of traffic should be ticketable if it isn't already. Has nothing to do with speeding....has to do with maintaining safe flow of traffic.



LC

We could carry this on all night, BUT there a hockey game on! LOL. We're up by 2. Night


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

How about the Henday? Residential is not where I see an issue. Did you read the entire article? Sorry but it is not up to any driver of a private or commercial vehicle to cause the flow of traffic to slow on purpose.

LC

There's enough room on the Hendey to safely pass two Ox carts without slowing down. I can't imagine the issue with passing or even following a Big Rig doing 90 kph for a few seconds. There is nothing being forced on other drivers other than to use their heads.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Salavee

Wow ! Road rage already ..and you're on the keyboard.

Road rage? Why you say that? It's not my fault lafarge is hiring inexperienced drivers.

Why don't we just drop the speed limit to 30km, that way everyone can feel warm and fuzzy inside?

You guys crack me up, because I want everyone to abide by the speed limits I'm a road raging speed demon..... LOL!!!

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Road rage? Why you say that? It's not my fault lafarge is hiring inexperienced drivers.

Why don't we just drop the speed limit to 30km, that way everyone can feel warm and fuzzy inside?

You guys crack me up, because I want everyone to abide by the speed limits I'm a road raging speed demon..... LOL!!!

I think you may be seeing the posted speed limit as the speed that must be maintained . Wrong .. it is a maximum speed limit under ideal conditions... both weather and traffic. Warm, fuzzy and a helluva lot safer.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Salavee

I think you may be seeing the posted speed limit as the speed that must be maintained . Wrong .. it is a maximum speed limit under ideal conditions... both weather and traffic. Warm, fuzzy and a helluva lot safer.

The posted speed limit has been the same for over 40yrs, do you think there has been maybe a little improvement in the performance of today's automobiles over those 50yrs ago? Do you think maybe brakes, suspension, rubber, even driver visibility has all improved immensely??? The most advanced automobile made in the 60's can't compare with today's base models in terms of safety.

This decision by lafarge is nothing more than an attempt to earn a golden star from the teacher, while forcing their drivers to become road hazards.

[Stinky Buffalo]

Originally Posted by Newview01

Maybe Lafarge's main interest is cutting fuel costs. 10 km/h on a fleet that size would be huge cost savings.

Pretty sure that is a factor!

...Carbon taxes and all...

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

The posted speed limit has been the same for over 40yrs, do you think there has been maybe a little improvement in the performance of today's automobiles over those 50yrs ago? Do you think maybe brakes, suspension, rubber, even driver visibility has all improved immensely??? The most advanced automobile made in the 60's can't compare with today's base models in terms of safety.

This decision by lafarge is nothing more than an attempt to earn a golden star from the teacher, while forcing their drivers to become road hazards.

It's not todays vehicles that concern me. It's some of the nuts behind the steering columns that are the problem. Those haven't changed one bit. Just more of them.

[fishead]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

So now instead of 2 passes on a 100 km stretch of hiway, you are now forcing about 30 passes. Genius.

Please give me a break, have you ever driven the QE2? How about trancanada to Vancouver? No reason for the big rigs to be in a race they drive the routes all the time. In the past truckshad a lower speed limit and I think that was a good thing. That's all I was getting at.
You think keeping right except to pass my is a bad idea?
Whatever
Genious!

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by fishead

Please give me a break, have you ever driven the QE2? How about trancanada to Vancouver? No reason for the big rigs to be in a race they drive the routes all the time. In the past truckshad a lower speed limit and I think that was a good thing. That's all I was getting at.
You think keeping right except to pass my friend is a bad idea?
Whatever
Genious!

Ask yourself if most of the hiways in Alberta are twinned.....

[bsmitty27]

Originally Posted by sureshot

I think this is a very poor decision by Lafarge. I've been a professional driver for 21 years, and pulled all types of combinations. This makes the trucks a hazard on the road, as now instead of 1 or 2 people trying to pass it will be 10 or 12, which will now lead to more road rage incidents and accidents. It's bad enough now as it is. Just because it's a concrete mixer doesn't make it any less maneuverable through traffic.

Yes a concrete mixer is much less maneuverable through traffic!
And it is set as a speed LIMIT to be driven under excellent conditions for all vehicles, with that I think its reasonable to assume that a concrete mixer loaded or not driving 10k under the max speed limit for any vehicle on the road is reasonable.
I understand single lane roads being a hazard because of passing. But I don't see the argument on multi lane highways. Also take in to concideration most of my driving g is done on relaxed rural highway 16 not hectic highway 2. But the hazards on highway 2 are the ones doing 140 swerving through traffic not the guy going 10 under.
Brad