Trans4Cast: Week 51: 2017
MDI Hits all time record!
Supreme Court Rejects ELD appeal, ending OOIDA’s Challenge Options
In a victory for the U.S. Department of Transportation, the U.S. Supreme Court has said it will not hear a lawsuit challenging a Department of Transportation (DOT) rule requiring truck operators to use electronic logging devices (ELDs) to track hours of service. The Supreme Court’s June 12 decision leaves in place a lower court ruling upholding the mandate and its Dec. 18 compliance deadline. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) spearheaded the lawsuit, with its outside legal counsel representing OOIDA and owner-operators Richard Pingel and Mark Elrod. OOIDA says it’s “extremely disappointed that the Supreme Court does not see the merit in reviewing our case with so many questions about its constitutionality.”
OOIDA says it will continue to press the issue in Congress and with the Trump Administration, as it announced at the Mid-America Trucking Show in March, 2017. OOIDA has not said specifically what initiatives it will undertake in Congress, but it could take the form of an effort to attach an amendment to a larger piece of legislation.
The American Trucking Association (ATA), meanwhile, says it concurs with the Supreme Court’s decision. “We are pleased to see that the Supreme Court will not interfere with the implementation of this important, and Congressionally mandated, safety rule. We will continue to support Federal Motor Carrier Safety Association (FMCSA) as they work toward the December deadline for electronic logging devices and urge them to provide certainty to the industry about when and how to comply with this rule by continuing to move toward implementing this regulation on schedule.” The Truckload Carriers Association (TCA) has long supported federal laws and regulations requiring the use of electronic logging devices (ELD) for documenting compliance with hours of service (HOS) rules.
OOIDA sought to have the mandate struck down in court, arguing it violated drivers’ Constitutional protections against warrantless searches and seizures and that the rule did not meet Congressional stipulations set for an ELD mandate. In its appeal to the Supreme Court, OOIDA and the trucker plaintiffs argued the mandate has implications even outside of trucking, as it pertains to “millions of ordinary citizens going about their normal work days under constant, electronic surveillance without warrants,” said OOIDA Executive Vice President Todd Spencer last month. OOIDA brought the lawsuit in March 2016 against the DOT and its sub-agency the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. A three judge panel on the Chicago-based 7th Circuit Court of Appeals heard the case last September. The next month, it ruled against OOIDA and in favor of the DOT, dismissing all of OOIDA’s arguments against the mandate. The plaintiffs appealed the ruling to the 7th Circuit, asking for a rehearing en banc — that is, for all 13 judges on the 7th Circuit bench to evaluate whether the case can be reheard. That appeal was denied. The 7th Circuit appellate court is only outranked by the U.S. Supreme Court. In April, OOIDA filed a writ of certiorari asking the Supreme Court to take up the case. The justices conferred on OOIDA’s appeal June 8. Its decision issued Monday effectively ends OOIDA’s court challenge.
Below are links to couple of good articles that illustrate the work which must occur before December 18:
Yesterday, while recording our 2017-18 Session 1 entitled Commercial Motor Vehicle Inspections’ Effect on Insurance with Tommy Ruke (which airs as 4 hours of state approve CE on June 26) we discussed this June 12th ruling. While it’s impossible to predict the future, it seems pretty safe that those without electronic logs had best forget about either the Boy who Cried Wolf or Chicken Little in favor of the Little Engine That Could!
John H. Love
Trans4Cast: Week 49: 2017
Trans4Cast: Week 48: 2017
Happy Cyber Monday! Forget Black Friday! Our End of Year Sale Is On!
WEL IS YOUR SOLUTION
- OUR STAFF AVERAGES MORE THAN 13 YEARS TRUCKING INSURANCE EXPERIENCE
- YET WE ARE A YOUTHFUL 41 YEARS AVERAGE AGE
- WE’VE SPENT 30% OF OUR LIVES WORKING HERE FOR OUR CARRIERS AND RETAILERS
I turned 58 years old Saturday and am into my 36th year at WEL – that’s more than 60% of my life I have worked here! I don’t mind getting older – beats the alternative, right? I wish to thank all of you reading this for helping to keep my job fun, interesting and rewarding! So, I got to thinking, how do we stack up numerically as a staff? As you can see from above, the most unique statistic about the WEL staff is that with an average age of less than 42, WEL staff averages 13.1 years of WEL insurance experience. Also, collectively we have spent 30% of our lives in this building working for you!
WE ARE CELEBRATING WITH OUR FIRST EVER END OF YEAR SALE! OUR RESPONSE TO CYBER MONDAY!
To celebrate, we have a little internal contest between underwriters because maybe we are just a bit too comfortable. I hope our carrier friends will not fret, because we have decided to celebrate our longevity with an end of the year sale! For now through December 31st, all new business bound here at WEL will receive 20% off our regular rates! Just uhh, just kidding, sorry. However, we do have some service and expanded authority news up our sleeves to help you. See, we really appreciate your business! We will outwork our competition and we will always be here to answer your questions! While not a 20% discount, we do have some ideas to help you through the end of 2017 and into 2018. Help us help you end this year with lots of great underwriting success! Contact your WEL underwriter for details!
“May you live to be 100 – and may the last voice you hear be mine!” – Frank Sinatra
John H. Love
Trans4Cast: Week 44: 2017
Canal Update #7
Giving everyone a chance to review Paul’s letter of yesterday (which will be posted on our website in the morning) below are the specifics related to the Assumption of Liability (AoL) Coverage Option he described. To clarify, the Assumption of Liability (AoL) fee is:
- Three cents per dollar of annual premium has consistently been the calculated fee, which is a flat charge.
- For current policies the fee would be prorated.
- The fee is a one-time fully earned, non-commission and non-refundable item, somewhat like a policy fee from an accounting perspective.
- Endorsements will not have a fee applied – the fee relates to the initial estimated annual premium.
- The fee will not appear on the Canal policy, but a separate confirmation of Assumption of Liability coverage certificate will be issued to each Canal insured that chooses Assumption of Liability as an Option.
- Your certificates of insurance may reference both Canal and State National as insurers for AoL risks.
WEL answers to frequently asked questions:
- When can we expect to see this AoL option for our clients? Next week.
- Will it be sent over on every client in the very near future? No, only upon request.
- Who will pay this “direct fee”? Right now the client. WEL is happy to discuss this matter further and listen to all opinions.
- If the answer is the client, is it negotiable? Perhaps, but currently no agreement of this sort exists.
- We hear reports regarding a lot of Canal business moving mid-term and were being told that shippers were not loading Canal clients. WEL does not see this as true on any level regarding accounts moving from us. As Canal’s largest GA, we would know if accounts are moving mid-term. As of today they are not – not at all. And no problem for us so far on renewals, although we have answered a lot of questions for different folks, To date, for WEL clients, Canal has successfully convinced every freight broke and every shipper that has questioned Canal’s downgrade to accept Canal as an insurer for the purpose of moving loads.
- Whatever the case, “noise” is not good; so the AoL option is going to be necessary I feel. We agree with you in spite of the sentence above. However, the AoL option will not be needed for some accounts – we have already been told so, somewhat to our surprise. To support your thoughts, we think without the AoL option we will spend too much time putting out fires. There are a lot of moving parts here, but overall I think Canal’s approach will work and allow us to move on down the road.
Remembering Canal’s 75+ years of commitment to all of us and their current very well capitalized financial position, our goal is to do the best with Canal and all of our markets for every submission we receive. Our staff can and will discuss further this issue as you request. We appreciate your needs, opinions and business.
John H. Love