Truck News

Blog

Taking a position on Ontario’s speed limiter legislation


As expected, the Ontario government finally tabled legislation that would require all trucks operating in the province to be mechanically limited to 105 km/h. The writing has been on the wall since the Ontario Trucking Association (OTA) first introduced the policy back in 2005. Now, it’s appears the proposal will become a reality.
The policy has gained momentum ever since the OTA announced it in 05, and comments from the MTO’s Chris Brant in the current issue of Truck News suggested a formal endorsement from the provincial government was near. “We are not going to wait forever,” Brant told our correspondent, Carroll McCormick. Indeed.
Yesterday the legislation was formally announced by the Ontario Liberals. They hope to have the law on the books by 2009 with an educational enforcement period allowing drivers to come to terms with the new rule.
Between now and then, and undoubtedly for some time after, we’ll be deluged with complaints about the law from drivers and owner/operators who view it as an invasion of their rights and a misguided attempt to level the playing field between small and large carriers (most of which already govern their trucks).
I’ve heard all the arguments for and against speed limiters, and I don’t fully subscribe to either school of thought. The doomsday scenario that the proposed law will create more accidents, force veteran drivers to leave the industry en masse and deter carriers domiciled in other jurisdictions from crossing into Ontario seems far-fetched and unrealistic. Drivers and carriers have overcome more significant hurdles than this. I don’t think Ontario’s proposed speed limiter law is going to mean the end of the industry as we know it.
On the other hand, I think the OTA’s touted fuel economy, environmental and safety benefits are over-stated. For one, governing trucks at 105 will only really affect how trucks are driven on the major highways where traffic usually flows at speeds well above 100 km/h. Driving habits on secondary highways and in urban areas won’t be improved just because a truck is governed at 105. I think that some fleets will achieve fuel savings and, by extension, there will be some corresponding environmental benefits – but not to the extent the OTA and the Ministry are suggesting. As for this rule’s impact on safety, only time will tell.
So now that I’ve ruffled feathers in both camps, it’s time to take a formal position on the issue. In doing so, I must ask the question: Is a speed limiter rule really necessary? And in my opinion, it is not. My daily commute is over 100 km and I spend a lot more time than that travelling Ontario’s highways. Anecdotally, I will tell you that speeding trucks are not a major concern in Ontario. I do encounter them on occasion – and probably will still encounter them on occasion once this legislation becomes law. But to introduced such broad-based legislation to control the speed of a handful of trucks seems like overkill. I would prefer to see incentives offered to carriers and owner/operators that voluntarily activate their governors or adhere to a speed control and fuel management program on their own. (And yes, fuel savings should be incentive enough).
While I don’t agree that Ontario’s speed limiter legislation (if passed) will have widespread repercussions for the industry, I do question whether the intended benefits of the law will ever be achieved. If they are, then I will concede it was a gutsy and worthwhile endeavor on the part of OTA. If not, then I must question whether the time and resources spent on bringing this law to fruition was well-spent. A thorough and impartial analysis of the law’s consequences won’t be available until the rule has been on the books for several years. Until then, let the debate continue.


James Menzies

James Menzies

James Menzies is editor of Truck News and Truck West magazines. He has been covering the Canadian trucking industry for more than 15 years and holds a CDL. Reach him at james@newcom.ca or follow him on Twitter at @JamesMenzies.
All posts by

Print this page

Related Posts



27 Comments » for Taking a position on Ontario’s speed limiter legislation
  1. Tom Desjarlais says:

    As a owner/opp in ontario but with 98 percent of my driving time in the USA i can see no beefit to the new law for speed limiters. The posted speed limit laws are on the books now but with the goverment trying to ram this down it just shows there is NO ENFORCEMENT of current laws.
    Drivers know that if you speed in the USA you get a ticket plain and simple , as for lowering our fuel costs that wont work most owners have already reduced our speeds , plan our routes and have installed APU devices to save costs , but with every savings increased prices have taken away our savings.
    The true answer to the SAFETY AND SPEED is enforcement with a visible police force , you can drive to toronto from windsor and never see a police car Thus showing that our goverment is not funding enforcement as it should .
    If large companies feel the need to restrict their truck speed let them do it,the safety problem is a lack of driver training and respect for the TRADE yes i said Trade same as a plumber or mechanic ,The days of the dumb trucker are long gone we are small bussiness men and women working hard to provide safe and secure jobs for the industry
    Tom Desjarlais
    La Salle on.

  2. Carl D. says:

    It’s amazing how people who have never driven a truck can make laws governing them. I hope that they are in a car that is stuck in traffic because a truck is trying to pass another and neither has the power to get past. I doubt that the one on the right is going to slow down. And the cars that get frustrated from having to slow down and wait for the truck in the laft lane to get past are gonna floor it when they finally can. Where is the safety in that?? The lawmakers sure have short memories. Remember all the signs on the back of trailers that read “This truck does not exceedd 90 KMH”? How long did that last? people that get stuck behind a truck need to remember that it’s not the drivers fault that they can’t get by, it’s the fault of a government that made it law. I also think that all those who voted for it should have their names posted so we can remember this come election time.

  3. Terry Larose says:

    James your post was excellent and I look forward in reading more from you in the future. Call them as you see them.
    Cheers

  4. Brian Bowen says:

    It would appear to me that whether we are talking commercial or passenger vehicles, mandating speed limiting technology is ill conceived and may be politically motivated by very few members of the one Provincial association with motives beyond public safety. We must remember the Minister of Transport is Jim Bradley, not David Bradley. Implementing speed limiters will not address those issues which imperil the public and members of the industry by a minority of commercial (not professional) drivers who operate in a manner inconsistent to public safety, including at speeds 20 or more KPH over the speed limit on roads with a posted maximum of 80 KPH or less where speed limiters would not have an effect including school and playground zones. How do speed limiters stop a truck sitting less than a car length off your back bumper going 65 MPH? How do speed limiters prevent trucks from rolling over and overcoming Newton’s first law “An object at rest tends to stay at rest and an object in motion tends to stay in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force” which is one problem if it happens on an on/off ramp, but another if the truck takes a turn in the road too fast or makes an erratic lane change at speed.
    Laws exist today which regulate speed. Why, some may argue, are there still vehicles speeding on our roads. The issue is enforcement, or lack of funding perhaps to enforce existing laws. I can’t believe that even with this new law enacted, that all vehicles would install limiters or for those vehicles with the capability built into their engine management systems, activated them. If the police and MTO staff have not been able to solve the problem of speeding with current staffing, how are they going to find the trucks which are not speed limited?
    Although I am not a mechanic, I assume speed limiters restrict engine performance to prevent a predetermined speed from being exceeded. I also would assume a driver who operates a vehicle where one of these speed limiters are enabled, and is equipped with a manual transmission, could simply depress the clutch going down hill after reaching 65 MPH and the vehicle, due to physics would exceed the speed limited by the device. This type of practise is probably as dangerous if not more so than running 5 MPH over the speed limit but with the transmission engaged.
    I can also see the eventuality that a commercial “hack” to the engine management software will be available within months if not days of the law being enacted. This software could limit the recording of the speed within the engine management system to 65 MPH, even if that speed were exceeded. Having grown up in a family that has been involved in the trucking industry for over 50 years, 75 going back to my grandfather, this effort seems to be misguided. Driver’s will complain that limiting the speed will have negative impacts on their performance including restrictions of HOS which may prevent them from completing their run. The OTA pushing through this legislation because their members collectively won’t implement fuel management programs that share savings from reduced fuel consumption with the driver, achieves the same ultimate goal without placing any additional burden on police or MTO staff to interrogate engine management systems. Why can’t all OTA members implement speed limiters for their own fleets and work with the CTA to implement voluntary implementation across Canada and the United States. Why does the OTA need a law enacted? With only non CTA/AMA member trucking companies without limiters, it will make it that much easier to find trucks that are speeding.
    Finally, since when has a law which was implemented to change a behaviour, eliminated the behaviour? Have illegal guns become a thing of the past with laws that control and limit gun ownership? Have police found there are no illegal narcotic drugs being sold and used because there are laws which prevent the possession and selling of them? If not, how are speed limiters going to solve the problem of speeding which is in fact a subset of the larger problem and includes dangerous operation of a motor vehicle?
    More enforcement of existing laws, not more regulation is the answer. Let’s put the political grandstanding and hidden motives aside and develop solutions that are properly focused to the responsibility of carriers to manage their drivers in combination with providing the MTO and police agencies with the resources to enforce the existing laws.

  5. Afzaal Ahmed says:

    I very much agree with james. This whole issue is nothing but level the playing field between small and large carriers . If somebody can tell me how safe is a Truck that drives at 105km/h compare to a Truck that goes maybe 110km/h. Its not the Truck that is unsafe at any given speed, in my opennion its the Driver. Same goes here for the environmental Issue. Just how much polution a Truck produces going at 110km/h compare to 105km/h. I think the resources and effort beeing spent on the speed limiter legislation, should be spent on producing environmentally freindly fuels, Trucks and Drivers. Truck produce more polution while Idling, yet many large companies have not installed a bunk heater or AC in any of their trucks. I thinkk OTA’s touted fuel economy, environmental and safety benefits are way over-stated.

  6. Joe Fields says:

    I agree with this new law being overkill.I think most owner operators do drive around 105 to 108 and to make this mandatory is really an invasion of our rights.I think Mr Bradley and all his OTA associates should try and level the playing field by taking care of all the incompatent and fly by night trucking companies that are out there right now.Just before Christmas one of these drivers went through a red light and killed two young ladies,and you know what he got? He can’t drive his car but he can still drive a truck and go through another red light and kill someone else is this fair? Where is the justice in this? If he was convicted of the crime then it would be discrimanation This is where you start with leveling the playing field .If one of these carriers get hauled into the scale and get put out of service because their truck is junk then it is discrimanation all over again. We all know this is true so why doesn’t Mr Bradely and the OTA look into these things before they attempt to control the whole trucking industry so all the bigger companies can monopolze the industry.
    Sincerely
    Joe Fields

  7. Leo Faber says:

    Just enforce the speed limit! Why spend millions on this on both sides,when all they need to do is enforce the speed limit. In Mich.the limit is 60 MPH with 0 tolerance,you don,t see many trucks going over the limit there.In other states the limit is 65 or 70 , some states are even higher.Why penalize us,and force us to work under ont.law in another jurisdiction. In mountainus states you would loose performace and fuel mileage because your truck would have to work twice as hard as it needs to,because you can,t get a run at the hill. I,m 51 year,s old and have been driving trucks for 34 years accident free. Slow down the younger and less experianced if you need to,that,s where most of are problems start. Thankyou.

  8. As a groyp of drivers we are trying to stop the passing of this governing law. Join our petition and show your support. Join at http://www.icantdrive105.com
    Thanks

  9. John Farkas says:

    Myself I think it’s a good idea,But they should’ve went one step further. I tink they should’ve made it so all commercial vehicles to be at 105,Nothing higher and nothing lower,let’s face it if you’re going slower then the speed limit especially on the major highways you are a target or an accident waiting to happen. You might as well put a bulls eye on the back of your trailer and paint an arrow and say “HIT HERE”. More so if you have trucks going out west where the speed limit is 110kms/h, Try driving that at 90kms/h.
    Why doesn’t our government do something more constructive like getting our U.S. neighbours to start reconizing our Canadian pardons or help Canadian drivers achieve what they need to cross the border,I keep hearing about how the industry is need of drivers but our government doesn’t look at what they can do for the drivers. I wish they would get it through their heads without drivers there are no trucks, No trucks, no products!
    One more thing….The truck I drive is governed for 90kms/h and I have school buses passing me, These are vehicles that are transporting our future, Maybe the government should look at safety and speed limits of 90kms/h for them or don’t they care about our future or the safety of our future!

  10. edward bakker says:

    How they will handel the U.S. trucks and the older trucks with mechanical injection pumps?
    I think a better live saver would be ,like in western
    europe , a much stonger tail light what you have to put
    on in fog ,snow or heavy rain .
    Most accidents under those conditions happen because
    the car or truck in front of you is seen to late
    Edward Bakker

  11. Sky W says:

    Is there a petition against the speed limit rule?, I’ll sign it!

  12. this law is nothing but a push for driver retention by big business and trucking companys that are members of the ota. They say that it will reduce accidents when in fact the U.S. DOT have studies that prove that having trucks traveling at different speeds than the cars actually increase the risk of accidents!but they won’t limit cars because that would piss off to many voters!As far as their arguement that it will reduce green house gases, than again it stands to reason that they would be even greater reduced if we put limiters on cars!However they won’t because the major auto companies would go crazy!!!!
    The issue I have is not that the speed will be limited to 105 I don’t drive that fast most times anyway it’s simpliy that I don’t think the government should be given the right to limit a vehicle that I purchased!This is just another intrusion on my personal rights!
    I have started a petition of my own please sign it so we can show them that we are not going to stand for this! http://www.icantdrive105.com

  13. Albert Beckham says:

    I don,t believe the OTA or the ontario govermant should be able to dictate the use of speed limiters on trucks if they are going to limit trucks they should also limit cars as i see a whole lot more speeding cars than trucks on our highways when its all said and done i believe it will cause more problems on the highways it just another way for the goverment to stick their nose in our business

  14. Brian Bowen says:

    It would appear to me that whether we are talking commercial or passenger vehicles, mandating speed limiting technology is ill conceived and may be politically motivated by very few members of the one Provincial association with motives beyond public safety. We must remember the Minister of Transport is Jim Bradley, not David Bradley. Implementing speed limiters will not address those issues which imperil the public and members of the industry by a minority of commercial (not professional) drivers who operate in a manner inconsistent to public safety, including at speeds 20 or more KPH over the speed limit on roads with a posted maximum of 80 KPH or less where speed limiters would not have an effect including school and playground zones. How do speed limiters stop a truck sitting less than a car length off your back bumper going 65 MPH? How do speed limiters prevent trucks from rolling over and overcoming Newton’s first law “An object at rest tends to stay at rest and an object in motion tends to stay in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force” which is one problem if it happens on an on/off ramp, but another if the truck takes a turn in the road too fast or makes an erratic lane change at speed?
    Laws exist today which regulate speed. Why, some may argue, are there still vehicles speeding on our roads. The issue is enforcement, or lack of funding perhaps to enforce existing laws. I can’t believe that even with this new law enacted, that all vehicles would install limiters or for those vehicles with the capability built into their engine management systems, activated them. If the police and MTO staff have not been able to solve the problem of speeding with current staffing, how are they going to find the trucks which are not speed limited?
    Although I am not a mechanic, I assume speed limiters restrict engine performance to prevent a predetermined speed from being exceeded. I also would assume a driver who operates a vehicle where one of these speed limiters are enabled, could simply depress the clutch or shift the truck into neutral going down hill after reaching 65 MPH and the vehicle, due to physics would exceed the speed limited by the device. This type of practise is probably as dangerous if not more so than running 5 MPH over the speed limit but with the transmission engaged.
    I can also see the eventuality that a commercial “hack” to the engine management software will be available within months if not days of the law being enacted. This software could limit the recording of the speed within the engine management system to 65 MPH, even if that speed were exceeded. Having grown up in a family that has been involved in the trucking industry for over 50 years, 75 going back to my grandfather, this effort seems to be misguided. Driver’s will complain that limiting the speed will have negative impacts on their performance including restrictions of HOS which may prevent them from completing their run. The OTA pushing through this legislation because their members collectively won’t implement fuel management programs that share savings from reduced fuel consumption with the driver, achieves the same ultimate goal without placing any additional burden on police or MTO staff to interrogate engine management systems. Why can’t all OTA members implement speed limiters for their own fleets and work with the CTA to implement voluntary implementation across Canada and the United States. Why does the OTA need a law enacted? With only non CTA/ATA member trucking companies without limiters, it will make it that much easier to find trucks that are speeding.
    Finally, since when has a law which was implemented to change a behaviour, eliminated the behaviour? Have illegal guns become a thing of the past with laws that control and limit gun ownership? Have police found there are no illegal narcotic drugs being sold and used because there are laws which prevent the possession and selling of them? If not, how are speed limiters going to solve the problem of speeding which is in fact a subset of the larger problem and includes dangerous operation of a motor vehicle?
    More enforcement of existing laws, not more regulation is the answer. Let’s put the political grandstanding and hidden motives aside and develop solutions that are properly focused to the responsibility of carriers to manage their drivers in combination with providing the MTO and police agencies with the resources to enforce the existing laws.

  15. James Mandley says:

    Having the goverment controlling truck speeds is stupid,Let the companys do it,As much as some trucks are,speeders and slow down the major percent of us don,t.It will cause more tailgating,road rage,and traffic backups,Can we sue the Ota when we get into a accident when someone rear ends us as they are too inpatience,Or for the lost of Revenue,We work on a 14 hour law now ,How much time will it cut into our day.The mto should take each company on it,s owm merits,If the companys get a lots of speeding tickets then put limiters on them for a while,Not to penalize every company.

  16. Horace says:

    For all the smart guys here, they should limit trucks to 85 km/h, not 105, look what’s happening in Europe, and they have lighter and far more advanced trucks there. Nobody cares for safety here, right? Tell that to a widow, to a child that lost his parents, every time I see a prehistoric tanker passing me on the fast lane at 120 I shake my head.. And it’s not only about safety, do the math and you’ll see how much you can cut the costs (simple physics) by running a truck at 85-90 km/h.
    Before anybody start sending hate answers, I worked in Europe in international transportation and I work here now, the drivers and the trucks in Canada are at LEAST 10 years behind Europe. I am a Public Safety Counselor for Dangerous Goods (road transportation) ADR certified if anybody knows what means that. I’ve seen hideously accidents with human life loss, material and time loss and you should take the time to think “what if it’s my turn next time? is it worth it?”
    Any driver that is driving his 85 ton truck over 100 is just irresponsible. Try to think from a different point of view, not with your pocket..

  17. Lukasz Piechocki says:

    To last post, You worked at Europe, so I think you have no idea about transportation in Europe except truck quality. 1st trucks in Europe has speed limit to 95 km/h not 85, distance always is much shorter then in North America, and they have much more heavy loadas than we have per axel. Proof, start pulling overseas containers from europe, even if u have tridem trailer very often on drive axle is more than 39000 LBS, and regular tractor in Europe has only 2 axles including steer axle.
    So next time if u start talking about Europe fist spend more than 1 year in transportation over there. I know what I’m talking I am from Poland, ex truck driver overe there and I am doing the same here in Ontraio.

  18. Randy Bell says:

    This is ridiculous how can a few wild truck drivers that have no respect for speed laws or the motoring public affect the rest of us, I think the way to road safety is through enforcement? Why should I have to govern my truck if I have not had a speeding ticket in fifteen years? Maybe the government should make profiles of offenders and associate that profile with the offending driver and it would follow the driver him or her wherever they may be employed. I strongly disagree with this law for the simple fact I drive minimal kilometers in Ontario and Quebec, but with that said I guess I have no choice but to comply and have my truck governed, my question is how does the government plan to pay me for something that they made me do I just call Caterpillar and they want $105.00 to do about ten minutes work. I know I am never going to see that money from them and I am not going to be driving in Ontario very much but oh well this is Ontario where the government only thinks about there wallets not the people that drive this province.

  19. Dave MacDonald says:

    This is a ridiculous situation to begin with – that only occurs because lawmakers are wishy-washy, and as a result – citizens get a feeling of “entitlement” Let’s look at this closely – There is a law in place which indicates the “MAXIMUM” speed to be travelled on municipal and provincial roads and highways. To put a law in place allowing trucks to travel over 100km per hour in a 100km per hour zone in itself shows there is no control within the lawmakers. There is a sign on the 401 listing fines for 20km over the speed limit – for 25km – for 30km etc – so, people see this and feel that although the sign says 100KM MAXIMUM – I will not be ticketed for 119km per hour – so therefore – that is the speed limit – and they set their cruise control – and they are right – they don’t get a ticket. I, on the other hand – respect the sign that says 100km per hour – yet if I am travelling within the law – and a transport truck comes up behind me locked in at 105 km – society believes him to be correct – and I should get out of the way. So in terms of this argument – both sides are wrong – By setting a maximum speed higher than the posted maximum, is the equivilent of telling motorists that signs that say “maximum” really mean “suggested” Things are different today than 25 years ago – it used to be difficult for lawmakers to enforce variances in speed – today, however – we can spot a gps device on a trout in the center of Lake Superior – and our radar can certainly tell the difference between a vehicle travelling 99 km per hour and one travelling 103 kmh. As far as I am concerned – lawmakers need to step up and propose speed limits that are reallistic – and practice zero tollerance as they do in many of the major cities in North America. If the speed limit were 110 kmh on the 401 – and trucks were limited to either 105 or 110, they would meet their deadlines – and would not be a negative distraction on the roads. Vehicles would certainly pass the trucks – put if enforcement is strict and consistant, those instances would fade in time. If I were responsible for setting a maximum speed limit of 100 kmh on a certain stretch of highway, and another provinicial body gave authorization to travel 105 kmh – I would feel that I had been underminded.
    True story – I was driving down Highway 3 in Fort Erie, Ontario which is a regional road – posted maximum is 80km per hour and it is a two lane road. I was travelling the maximum of 80 – and I was anticipating a left turn – so quite correctly – I was in the left lane. A car came up behind me and started flashing his lights – almost hitting me he was driving so close – and honking his horn. He swung out right into traffic and cut in front of me – he got out of his car and came up to me yelling at how I was blocking the “FAST LANE” – along with some other prophanities. What message is that sending – You can read any handbook or government flyer – if a car is doing the maximum speed – there is no way legally to pass them – but because our law enforcement makes the rules on some kind of “hidden document” they would likely view me to be partially at fault for obeying the laws – since clearly they have no intention of enforcing them. This is the 21st Century – Post reasonable maximums – and practice zero tollerance – that way everyone wins –

  20. Lisa Kehrli says:

    I am not a truck driver, but I think these speed limiters should be used in cars before considering it on trucks.
    When driving on the highway, I am far more concerned about irresponsible car drivers than any truck driver.
    If more drivers had common sense and gave large trucks room and respect, a lot of truck accidents would not happen.
    How about the road rage drivers who speed way beyond 140 km/h and get caught doing it? Why not put speed limiters on their cars for a start?

  21. dan christink says:

    this makes me laugh i drove for the checker board express in the 80;s and we were limited to 90 k driving the roads in ont. was a joke, holding up lines of motorists in a hell bent furry to get either to or from the cottage was a real knickle biter the chances people took to get past a big slower truck was mind blowing and back in those days there was only a faction of the traffic on the roads, will be interestering to see if this project by the ont. gov, succeeds or will truck/car accidents increase??

  22. dan christink says:

    does anyone know where one can find a program that one could download to ones laptop to change the ecu on ones truck to conform with up coming law reguarding speed limiters in ontario???????

  23. Matt Comfort says:

    Hello
    I am a north american truck driver, I travel 90 % of my miles outside of Ontario, I travel between 90 and 100km/h when in ontario due to the amount of traffic and wildlife in the summer, and the weather in the the winter months, I am a professional and greatly appreciate the weight and size of my unit, I also love my family! therefore I drive in a manner that is safe for the conditions, now when in Sask or Ab I travel at 115 to 120km/h still mo more then 10km over the posted limit so with my truck being restricted to 105 I can not even do the posted speed in western canada or alot of the mid western states! its bad enough they tell me I have to stop wether I am tired or not ! and if I am tired in the day i cant afford to stop as it cuts into my shift and can not cover the same amount of miles as i should, I as other agree limiters should be in place for repeat speeding offenders big or small!! my truck is currently not limited!! and unless they plug into me and see they will never know ! as I do not go more then 105 in ontario!
    thanx for reading

  24. Edmund Evans says:

    i have no problem driving a 105, it is only 2km under what i usually driver, with the setup of my truck at 1600 rpm i get the best fuel milage, but i have a problem with my gout forcing me to do what they say,, i can kinda understand if they were to make all the trucks that are ontario plated have a regulator,,, but any truck travelling through,, thats crazy,, what about when i drive in n.b. where the speed is 110 or in the south west where it is 75mph,, who are they to regulate me wherever i drive,, now at 105 my truck do noy engage and start pulling until 102, as soon as i see a hill, i have to shift back a gear,, and running nfld and the rockies, it is useless,,, i am pissed off so much about this,,, when are we gonna get together and put a stop to suits makin dicessions without even askin us how it will effect us,, we need to make a stand,,,,,lets get together and fight this,,,, and also fight the 244 wheel base law,,,alot of us sleep in our trucks more than our bed at home and would like to have a bigger bunk,, what difference do it make to our gout if we have a harder time backin up or takin corners,,, we need to make a stand, i have been a otr driver 20 years and have seen alot of change,, we have to work our ass off to make a living and it is getting unbearable,,,,right now i work appro 80 hrs a week and get paid for 50,, it is the only industry were you sit and unload for 10 hrs and they pay you for 5,,,i was born and bred in trucks and love to drive,,, but this is crazy,,,,,,,lets wake up people and make a stand,,,,,,,,,,Edmund Evans

  25. Mike Morigeau says:

    I can’t wait for the first stupid ticket! It’s a PROVINCIAL NOT FEDERAL LAW. So it simply doesn’t apply to a Federal Carrier. Nor does the gawd almighty beauracrat that wrote this pile of stupid have the legality to enforce it. Bring it on!
    In My ever beit so humble opinion of course! You know how intreverted us westerners can be.

  26. Jean says:

    I have always liked Ont. But for them to make my company turn my truck down I will quit crossing the border, it is not worth my time driving that slow when there is no traffic out. My husband and I drive a team truck and that is putting more work on the drivers and no more pay.We would rather quit our job than cross the border again. They do not understand we have long hours of work anyway and most wrecks that involve trucks comes from a car that has cut them off maybe they should slow the cars down. This is going to slow freight down to much, the roads will be more crowded so that will mean more wrecks

  27. jerry says:

    just wondering if there is anything on the market to swithch the speed limit while in canada and then right back when i get back to the states like a toggle swith or something?

Have your say:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*