Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Trucking Industry Needs More Drivers. Maybe It Needs to Pay More

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 179 posts

Re: The Trucking Industry Needs More Drivers. Maybe It Needs to Pay More

#161

Post by Karunamon »

sanswork wrote: post #152
Karunamon wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going to disagree with you there on inclement weather. Getting a self-driving system to work on sunny days and clear nights when there's an otherwise clean view of the road and surroundings is one thing, and that's the challenge I see most people working on right now. Now try the same thing in the middle of winter, the equivalent of visual noise is obstructing both the road and the surroundings. People are good at pi…

People are horrible at driving in any kind of bad weather. They speed through foggy conditions where they can't see 50 feet in front of them. They drive too fast or erratically on icy or snowy conditions, or they just flat out don't know how to handle the conditions and swerve/oversteer. If people were any good at it there would be no increase in crashes during winter, foggy or wet weather conditions. Self driving ve…

I said people were good at picking out patterns, not that they were necessarily good drivers.

Re: The Trucking Industry Needs More Drivers. Maybe It Needs to Pay More

#162

Post by sanswork »

Karunamon wrote: post #161
sanswork wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are horrible at driving in any kind of bad weather. They speed through foggy conditions where they can't see 50 feet in front of them. They drive too fast or erratically on icy or snowy conditions, or they just flat out don't know how to handle the conditions and swerve/oversteer. If people were any good at it there would be no increase in crashes during winter, foggy or wet weather conditions. Self driving ve…

I said people were good at picking out patterns, not that they were necessarily good drivers.

Yup and I said with technology it doesn't really matter since computers aren't limited to our visual spectrum(they can use thermal imaging when needed for example) so they won't have the same difficulty seeing in those conditions as we do.

This is further compounded by the fact that even if humans can see the patterns they rarely act on them perfectly and often do the exact opposite of what they should do.

Re: The Trucking Industry Needs More Drivers. Maybe It Needs to Pay More

#163

Post by erichocean »

the_ancient wrote: post #139
_yosefk wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If drivers spend much time loading and unloading, and not getting paid, the amount paid per mile required to attract drivers will rise.

In theory yes,.,, almost 100 years of history says no this is not the case

> If drivers spend much time loading and unloading, and not getting paid, the amount paid per mile required to attract drivers will rise.

Actually, logic would indicate that it has already happened. Every industry pays people the least amount that it can reliably obtain labor and/or reliably profit from their employment. Trucking is no different.

Re: The Trucking Industry Needs More Drivers. Maybe It Needs to Pay More

#164

Post by erichocean »

crassus2 wrote: post #33
polarix wrote: post #5

> But corporate America has become so parsimonious about paying workers outside the executive suite that meaningful wage increases may seem an unacceptable affront. In this environment, it may be easier to say “There is a shortage of skilled workers” than “We aren’t paying our workers enough,” even if, in economic terms, those come down to the same thing.

If a business owner raises wages, he solves his labor problem but spends more money and reduces profit. If instead he complains about a labor shortage, then maybe politicians will pass a law allowing more immigration and he will be able to lower his wages and increase his profit. It's beneficial for business owners for there to be a general belief in a labor shortage but it is not beneficial for people to believe the…

> It's beneficial for business owners for there to be a general belief in a labor shortage but it is not beneficial for people to believe they are stingy.

It's even better for the business owner for citizens to believe that their government plays a key role in "providing" jobs; it's what allows businesses to lobby government to change the rules to "help job creators" instead of just paying more.

Government or market, it's our choice. Lately, we're more and more choosing government to solve market "problems" that exist only because we are willing to let the government act on those problems. If we didn't, the market wouldn't have said problem.

Re: The Trucking Industry Needs More Drivers. Maybe It Needs to Pay More

#165

Post by Terr_ »

Yardlink wrote: post #80
Terr_ wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a false-dilemma to assume it needs to be total automation or nothing at all. What about "trains" of trucks, where the first truck is piloted and the rest follow? That'd be significantly easier to engineer, and there'd be a person on-site for miscellaneous needs like gassing them up.

One of the major advantages of trucks over trains is precisely that - they're not trains. Making them trains would take away all the flexibility they currently have. If you're taking coal from the mine to the power station then you're probably already using a train. Anything less predictable needs individual trucks.

"Trucks aren't trains" is a tautology.

First, having 2-5 trucks in an automatic convoy is still ENORMOUSLY different than a multi-locomotive train with 10+ or even 100+ wagons on fixed rails.

Second, even if you equalized their "sizes", a three-truck convoy is NOT magically equivalent to a three-wagon train, because they are running on fundamentally different infrastructures.

Re: The Trucking Industry Needs More Drivers. Maybe It Needs to Pay More

#166

Post by eru »

zo1 wrote: post #113
eru wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We wouldn't have this conversation, if immigration was sane in the first place. Ie let anyone in. It's such a waste of human labour.

Would never happen. People in certain countries get way too many free things and benefits, and are used to much higher standards of living. They'd be up in arms every time they saw an "immigrant" using it, or if an immigrant reduces the value of labor. It's really unfortunate because the only reason most people are against immigration, deep down, is that they fear they will be usurped by cheap labor. And that is only…

> Would never happen. People in certain countries get way too many free things and benefits, and are used to much higher standards of living. They'd be up in arms every time they saw an "immigrant" using it, or if an immigrant reduces the value of labor.

Don't give the immigrants any welfare then, and only let them stay as long as they have any kind of job (plus a few weeks grace period) or can prove they have enough money and a return ticket.

Re: The Trucking Industry Needs More Drivers. Maybe It Needs to Pay More

#167

Post by erichocean »

tomjen3 wrote: post #102
hibikir wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The strength of the argument changes with market elasticity. If a single company has trouble hiring, they can raise salaries. However, if the pool of workers remains finite, all you are really doing is switching which company has the hiring problem. If two people need an all day plumbing job done today, and there's only one plumber in time, one of them is not going to get it done, regardless of how much they pay. So…

> if the pool of workers remains finite You take an alternative. There may only be one plumber, but if he is bid up to a million I am going to spend a day doing it myself, buy an entirely new WHATEVER_WE_ARE_REPLACING or do without. If the price of scotchs go to 50 usd per centilitier I am going to buy rum. If programmers start charging 10000 usd/day I am going to continue doing my spreadsheets by hand. Your analysis…

> If programmers start charging 10000 usd/day I am going to continue doing my spreadsheets by hand.

This is funny for two reasons:

1. Programmers do earn $1000 USD/day—it's only $125/hour. My rate is $225 and has been for years.

2. Spreadsheets are a killer app precisely because you don't need to be a programmer to use them. Prior to spreadsheets, all computer-based accounting was done by hiring and paying programmers. Spreadsheets ended that which is why they are (and continue to be) so successful.

:)

Re: The Trucking Industry Needs More Drivers. Maybe It Needs to Pay More

#168

Post by erichocean »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #126
cauterized wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But for any job that requires training there is a delay between raising wages and the labor supply expanding. Granted, for truckers it's not very long, but for something like software developers it can be half a decade, in which time those who choose to pursue expensive training in hope of eschewing a high-demand job also risk graduating into another burst bubble.

Also, you're just moving unemployment from one category to another. There's unemployment in every field. The fundamental issue is, with automation we no longer need everyone to work. As robotics advances the problem will just get worse. We've never, ever needed as many engineers as we've needed laborers and assembly-line workers. Making them all into skilled labor is absurd for many reasons, not least of which is, we…

> Making them all into skilled labor is absurd for many reasons, not least of which is, we don't need that many engineers.

I'm not sure "we don't need that many engineers" is defensible. Who's to say how many are "needed" or not? I see no reason why the world couldn't have many more engineers (and scientists) working and still doing useful work.

Seriously. How do people look around at the world today and think: Yup, everything is peachy. Let's just sustain this, folks, we're good.

As long as there's a third world, we're nowhere close to having enough of anything, including engineers. There's still a shit ton of work to be done just to get the world to an acceptable level for all people.

Re: The Trucking Industry Needs More Drivers. Maybe It Needs to Pay More

#169

Post by eru »

crassus2 wrote: post #146
eru wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We wouldn't have this conversation, if immigration was sane in the first place. Ie let anyone in. It's such a waste of human labour.

Culture is capital. The degree of social trust and respect for property needed to create a wealthy society is an historical anomaly. If we didn't have borders, the whole world would be the third world.

The 19th century had pretty open borders. That's when the white world got rich.

Re: The Trucking Industry Needs More Drivers. Maybe It Needs to Pay More

#170

Post by crdoconnor »

judk wrote: post #144
crdoconnor wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What seems more likely, actually, is that you will get Akerlof's classic lemon market - due to the information asymmetry of paying by the mile. The employer knows how much value the driver's gonna contribute for the money they pay, but the potential drivers aren't at all sure how much income they'll get paid for their time/effort. They basically only have hearsay from other drivers/ex-drivers to go on. Furthermore, s…

The market for lemons doesn't really apply here, because a lemon market requires a supply that is heavily weighted toward worthless goods, to drag the average down to 0 as the "best" opportunities are withdrawn from market.

Nope. It just requires information asymmetry, which IS the case here. Trucking companies know more about what income their potential workers will make than the potential workers will themselves.

Experienced truckers will have less information asymmetry, but experienced truckers need to be replenished as they retire. Apparently that's not happening.

Post reply on HN