Plow Operators Object to GPS Tracking System

An anonymous reader writes "The Boston Globe is reporting on a dispute between private plowing contractors and the state highway department. The state has mandated all trucks to equip with GPS enabled cellphones for tracking. The drivers have refused, just in time for a big winter storm. The latest seems to be that they have reached a compromise (no details yet), but the dispute highlights the public safety versus employee privacy issue. Presumably plowing could be more efficient and possibly save lives during storms if the trucks could be tracked.. a good thing. Or is this simply a step closer to an Orwellian society, where the State knows where we all are?" This earlier story does a much better job of detailing their grievances - apparently it's about money as much as anything, with the GPS tracking system being only a secondary issue.

Comments

On GPS and Privacy

[mandalayx]

There was a recent NPR story on the recent rise of GPS usage amongst company cars. Interesting stuff, and they mention a little about unions' concern as well.

Re:On GPS and Privacy

[56ker]

That's a bit different though as company cars belong to the company, the /. story referred to contractor's vehicles.

Re:On GPS and Privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Who would want the Boss to know that you are at the Doughnut Shop rather than out on the road?

sounds like a snow job

[circletimessquare]

rimshot

seriously, i don't see how this is orwellian in the least

Re:sounds like a snow job

[loadquo]

Maybe they are worried that the Pigs will be able to track them by GPS and forcefully take over their snow plows.

Re:sounds like a snow job

[tacocat]

This isn't an orwellian society move. I think it's actually rather reasonable when you consider everything that they have here.

• These GPS requirement apply to independent contractors and not to State Empoloyees.
• GPS tracking will only be required while the contractor is actively working on a contracted obligation.
• There is a mis-statement in the story that operating GPS telephones is going to be complicated and dangerous. If the phones are configured correctly then can provide GPS data on a Pull basis and not a Push. That is, the base operators can obtain your GPS without your intervention. This is what the GPS-911 feature is all about.
• It's reasonable that the Employer have some means of validating that the work they are paying for is indeed getting performed. Is there a more cost effective means that you can think of?

I've lived in a variety of areas where they have contractors for snow removal. In general it's not a very good arrangement in terms of getting the work done. And there is more than enough opportunity for the contractor to give the snow job to the State, City, County that is paying for it.

Re:sounds like a snow job

[Anonymous Coward]

True, except that they are also using the phones for tracking payment, which the snow-plow drivers say has not been tested or proven reliable.

Re:sounds like a snow job

[anti-tech]

I do not see anything wrong with be able to track an employee who says he is working. After every snowstorm, there are numerous reports of thousands of dollars being claimed by plow operators for work that was not done. One time a guy claimed 24 hrs of pay in a 24 hr time period, even though his neighbors saw him spend all day at his house. And, at up to $300 dollars per hour, as a taxpayer, I certainly want to know that joe sixpack snow plow operator is actually working. Afterall, he can make more in one good storm than many workers make in a month.

Re:sounds like a snow job

[hey!]

# There is a mis-statement in the story that operating GPS telephones is going to be complicated and dangerous. If the phones are configured correctly then can provide GPS data on a Pull basis and not a Push. That is, the base operators can obtain your GPS without your intervention. This is what the GPS-911 feature is all about.

My company deals with these things.

They're not phones; they're black boxes with integrated GPS receiver and phone transceiver and NO user interface. They are typically mounted under the seat with antenna cables running to the roof. They're activated by the ignition, so there's essentially no user interface.

The devices also have analog and switch inputs. These make the case for plows extremely compelling: you can have a switch input closed when the plow is down. THen back at the office you plot the trucks path red when the plow is up and green where the plow is down. If you have all the plows set up, then all the plowed roads show green. In public safety, the 'discretes' are wired to things like the shotgun release in the trunk of police cars. When the cop goes for the shotgun, the cruiser starts blinking back at headquarters.

Managers are obviously interested in these things to make sure that people are where they are supposed to be. I think this is legitimate. But there are other compelling reasons for using the technology.

Re:sounds like a snow job

[Anonymous Coward]

How about its none of the governments damn business where the private farmers are??

Yes tracking farmers is a proper function of Mother Hen government....

*puke

Re:sounds like a snow job

[anthony_dipierro]

It's reasonable that the Employer have some means of validating that the work they are paying for is indeed getting performed. Is there a more cost effective means that you can think of?

Check whether or not the job gets done? Have the police report any problems they encounter while they're cruising around the streets anyway? Ask people at the town meeting if they're satisfied by the job? Actually listen to complaints from people rather than just appeasing them?

And there is more than enough opportunity for the contractor to give the snow job to the State, City, County that is paying for it.

That's what contracts and lawsuits are for. If they don't do the job right, you don't pay them.

Re:sounds like a snow job

[ergulon]

A couple of misconceptions in this thread: 1. They are phones, according to Boston Globe 12/7/2003. They are also set to permanent walkie-talkie status, enabling the contractors to be called and to call on a private, semi-permanent connection. 2. Complaints and lawsuits don't move one flake of current snow. The police aren't there to check up on contractors. Think for a second. You're a cop. You see a road not plowed. Do you assume it's been neglected? What do you think? (no cracks about is the road to Dunkin' Donuts plowed, PLEASE 3. There is no third thing 4. Note that the current contractors are beefing about next year's contract, not this one. They still have to go out there today, or breach o' contract. 5. The plowers actually got a nifty compromise - they asked that the systems be run in parallel, to check the veracity. This should have been on the table from the start, as a confidence builder. 6. What the plowers were so burned about was that now they can't do their sidework on state time. Note that even the compromise will clip their wings in this regard. But of course, they couldn't admit that. 7. Orwellian state? Puh-leez, go find something else to worry about - no shortage there.

Re:sounds like a snow job

[Technician]

If the contractor wants an accurate record to compare with the company billing/pay info, it's a simple task to connect a handheld GPS to a laptop computer and record the route for later playback. Several programs are able to do that off the shelf. Rand-McNally Streets and Trips and Delorme Co-Pilot come to mind. If a route plowed doesn't show up on your pay, you can replay the route including time, speed, elevation, number of satelites received and their signal strength. In short you have a permanent record of your trip updated each second. You can tell to the second how long you were waiting at the gravel yard waiting for a load of sand before heading out, etc.

I guess the real complaint is they can't bill a 10 hour job that only took 6.

Pilots need privacy too

[artakka]

I think the same applies to the pilots. It always bothers me when the radars track their airplane's position real time.
There should be a way for them to "opt-out". A "stealth mode" button will be nice. Pilots do not need the big-brother constantly watching them.

Re:Pilots need privacy too

[artakka]

And moderators need at least a little sense of humor.

O, well...

Re:Pilots need privacy too

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Quite a problem.

There should be a test to evaluate the moderators. Their humor skills leave MUCH to be desired.

Re:Pilots need privacy too

[Anonymous Coward]

There should be a way for them to "opt-out". A "stealth mode" button will be nice. Pilots do not need the big-brother constantly watching them.

There is such a switch in the cockpit of every aircraft. If you turn your transponder off, it's quite a bit harder to track an aircraft on radar.

If you do this intentionally in controlled airspace, though, this will really piss of the ATC folks and the FAA. Your pilot certificate would probably be suspended.

Of course, transponders do break ocasionally during a flight, and when that happens, pilots and controllers make due without it. The pilot doesn't get in trouble if they did their job (including the preflight safety checks) correctly.

As an aside for all of you non-pilots out there, a large part of flight training is learning how to handle emergencies like an electrical failure. When you learn to fly a multiengine aircraft, you have to learn how to fly it with one or more of the engines not running. Flying an airplane isn't very difficult (it requires about the same level of attention as driving a car in the snow) -- when everything's working.

Re:Pilots need privacy too

[LumberJack_GSI]

There should be a way for them to "opt-out".

It's called a GPS jammer

Many carriers in the US trucking industry require that their truckers have GPS systems to (a) track their location & (b) make sure that the drivers are taking their schedualed sleep breaks on long haul trips.

Drivers that want to get around the rules, just buy a GPS jammer & blame it on "mountains", "weather" or whatever other B.S. they can think of

This is contractual, not about privacy

[orthogonal]

Privacy issue my ass.

It's a contractual issue.

The employer (which happens to be the state) wants to know if the employee is really doing the work (or as much of the work as) the employee claims.

This is not about tracking where I go after work, or if I visit my mistress for an extra-martial screw.

It's all about ensuring the state gets what it pays for, and any tracking is done exclusively during the employee's work.

This is legal, and this is good.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Holi]

If I had mod points I would use them all on this. If they want the contract well we (the taxpayers) want to know exactly what you did to earn your pay. We foot the bill don't we have the right to know what you have done. It's not like it's a national security issue, I just want to know the eaiest way home.

Oh by the way, snow storm in New England, I have 8 inches in my driveway, and it's still coming down hard. Yay

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[strider_starslayer]

Don't forget this is also about accountability. My cousin living just outside of New York was nearly hit by a plough and just barely managed to jump out of the way, the plough then took off the grill on the front of his truck and he got sprayed with rocks as the thing went screaming past; he sent the bill to the city, the city had to pay it, but he was told that the city was very upset with this because it happened all over and all the plough operators were blaming the independent plough operators, and all the independent plough operators were blaming the company plough operators- ultimately the city had to swallow the bill itself without being able to pass it on to the guilty party despite the fact that my cousin had an accurate time for when the incident happened. With GPS tracking that won't happen again, they'll simply look up who was where, determine wither or not they were actually there, and present the bill to the proper party. I can see how many people would not like this accountability, but I'm surprised that there aren't any Plough operators who are all for this- since it will let those who are good at there job shine, and keep there job while those who are lazy/sloppy will finally get there's and be fired.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[mcpkaaos]

What about me, I lease my own plow. How am I gonna feel when I get fired because my boss somehow "just knew" I had his daughter out at the drive-in. You heartless bastard.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

"but I'm surprised that there aren't any Plough operators who are all for this- since it will let those who are good at there job shine, and keep there job while those who are lazy/sloppy will finally get there's and be fired."

Yeah, and that's what union negotiatiors are all about... ensuring some of the members will be fired. Sorry, that's the opposite.

The union protects the jobs of its members. That's the purpose of the union. Just as a defence lawyer doesn't have to believe his client is innocent, but must sitll defend him, the union defends the members. It's a confrontational system.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Knetzar]

Could there be some system where the GPS system can be turned on and off? And in order to bill time the system must be turned on for the whole billable period. That way the operator can choose to remain private and not get paid, or get paid and be held accountable.

Of course this brings up all sorts of problems, such as "You shut your plow off for 45min while you were supposed to be billed, and a crime happened to of occured during those same 45min, you must be guilty."

Oh well, nothing's perfect.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Yokaze]

You seem to have a very narrow understanding of the word privacy, it seems. Commonly, privacy doesn't only mean "private matter". In this context it means "the quality or state of being apart from company or observation".

> It's a contractual issue.
Yeah, and the contractors do not agree with the new contract terms. Case closed.

> wants to know if the employee is really doing the work (or as much of the work as) the employee claims.

Yes, but it offers the possibility of a different quality of control.
Not a casual check, whether the street/highway has been plowed by the contractor, but a minuit surveillance of every move of every single plow operator at work. I can imagine that most workers would be reluctant to agree to such terms.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[ipour]

If we were only talking about state employees - no question - they can and should be required to have GPS.

However, these are PRIVATE companies hired during heavy snowstorms to do contract plowing in addition to state workers. And their concern isn't privacy, it's billing. The state should be concerned too - you could have a truck running just about anywhere with its plow up - do they still get credit for plowing?

Sounds more like a simple issue of how one gets paid rather than some grand scheme of invading privacy!

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, and the contractors do not agree with the new contract terms. Case closed.

No. Fire them all. Place ads in the classifieds. Hire replacements. Case closed.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[ottawanker]

This is odd.. I would think that you would just get stuck with the bill like any other hit & run. How do you know it WAS a snowplow employed by the city? Even if there was a snowplow with GPS near, how do you know there wasn't also one without GPS, say privately owned to clear parking lots?

My car has a dent in the front, maybe I should say that I was hit by a plow.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[The Cornishman]

>or if I visit my mistress for an extra-martial screw. Well, that would be interesting. Is it your wife or your mistress that's the martian?

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

If we were only talking about state employees - no question - they can and should be required to have GPS.

I think this is a mis-worded statement. Did you really mean to say that the state vehicles should have GPS? Big difference.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[marauder404]

If it happened on a public street, it was operated by the city. Private operators won't be plowing the streets out of public service -- they're there to clear the parking lots of private property.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, and then we can do this for every other group or union that decides to strike, and then we'll really have a democratic society.

Seems like everyone is against Unions and their actions these days.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[alannon]

Many cities contract out some or all of their plowing to private operators or contracting firms. Same for road construction and most other services. This article is about contractors.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Sycraft-fu]

My supervisor has the right, if he wishes, to stand in my cubicle during the entire day and what what I do. He has the right to monitor me in other ways, if he wishes, as well. However, the instant I'm off work, he loses that power.

When you're at work, you're on your employer's dime. If they want to watch you all the time, that's their deal. If they want to install a camera in your office, that's fine. If you don't like it, quit. I have a friend that had the camera thing done to him and he DID quit. IT was his employer's right to play Big Brother and watch him and his right to tell them to stick it up their ass and get a new job.

Also contractors not agreeing to terms is NOT case closed. In many industries, it's not hard to find replacements.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

It's all about ensuring the [employer] gets what it pays for, and any tracking is done exclusively during the employee's work. This is legal, and this is good

It follows that you're a braying hypocrite if you object to a keylogger and surveillance camera being installed in your computer and over your workspace.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, voice of reason! Yeah you!

SHUT UP!

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[TwistedGreen]

Could there be some system where the GPS system can be turned on and off?

Yeah, it's called a power button.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[marauder404]

Sorry if I wasn't being clear, but the guy basically sent the bill to the city, who should have forwarded the bill to the contractor that was responsible. Without knowing who that contractor was, the city just paid it themselves. I thought ottawanker's question was how did the victim know that it wasn't a private contractor that wasn't being contracted by the city that hit him. Maybe I'm wrong. Or tired.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[PsiPsiStar]

>Wow, and then we can do this for every other >group or union that decides to strike, and then >we'll really have a democratic society.
>Seems like everyone is against Unions and their >actions these days.

Sounds good. If you can't do the government's work on the government's terms, you don't get the government's pay. And yes, this is a democratic notion. If I have to pay taxes for the roads to be cleaned, I want to know it's being done as effiently as possible. If the unions really want to keep people's respect and sympathy they should imitate some of the building unions and enforce a higher standard of quality control for labor. If they purpose of unions is to lobby for a small group of workers at the expense of the people who pay them (taxpayers in this case) then HELL YES, people will be against them.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

You got it, that was mostly my question. Either way, I still can't believe that the city payed the bill, with little proof (as far as I can tell) that they or one of their contractors were really at fault.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[delong]

Not to mention, the State is tracking ITS OWN DAMN PROPERTY. Orwellian indeed. What a douche.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFA. They are NOT tracking their own property, only the property of the contractors. State employees are for some reason exempt.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[rudabager]

Well if it were me and the city didnt pay the bill then I would charge them with attempted murder. After all the guy was almost hit by a snow plow charging on at full speed. Considering the story, weather true or not, the city pays the bill so that incase it is true such a charge isnt made.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[nolife]

Depends on where you live. I am on the fringe of a rural area. If it was not for my neighbors or others in the general area with thier Bobcats and snowplows, many of us would be stuck. Some are actual contractors certified with the state and some are not. No one has to park anywhere near the road so the risk of hitting a parked car is very low. Using farmers in a rural area makes sense as they can use thier big tractors that are not needed in the fields during the winter. They are required by state law to maintain a snow plow on for the entire season and must be able to be called upon within certain hours. Since many of these tractors have more capability then what the county and state maintain, they are often called out of thier normal areas to perform specific tasks. There's probably not many tractors in big cities but construction equipment would be a good candidate.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Rich0]

How about this slightly different version:

Don't forget this is also about accountability. My cousin living just outside of New York was nearly hit by a car and just barely managed to jump out of the way, the car then took off the grill on the front of his truck and he got sprayed with rocks as the thing went screaming past; he sent the bill to the insurance company, they had to pay it, but he was told that they were very upset with this because car accidents happen everywhere and car drivers were not stepping forward to accept the blame - ultimately the insurance company had to swallow the bill itself without being able to pass it on to the guilty party despite the fact that my cousin had an accurate time for when the incident happened. With GPS tracking that won't happen again, they'll simply look up who was where, determine wither or not they were actually there, and present the bill to the proper party. I can see how many people would not like this accountability, but I'm surprised that there aren't any car operators who are all for this- since it will let those who are good at driving shine, and keep there license while those who are lazy/sloppy will finally get there's and be locked up.

Sounds like a perfect argument for subcutaneous GPS implants to me!

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems like everyone is against Unions and their actions these days.

No, everyone is against those people who seem to believe they have a right to work where they choose and that employers no longer have any right to set conditions for employment.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[rmohr02]

I worked for a county highway department over the summer and found that when snowdrifts get real bad, they have a couple 10-foot hight, 13-foot wide snowplows that is put on the pieces of heavy equipment that are allowed on the roads. But normally dump trucks can handle it fine.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[gnu-generation-one]

It's a contractual issue.
It's all about ensuring the state gets what it pays for, and any tracking is done exclusively during the employee's work.
This is legal, and this is good.

By similar reasoning, we should attach GPS trackers to each of our elected representatives, to ensure that we get what we pay for, and that they're doing the work they claim to be doing.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[barzok]

Very poor comparison. This is about plow operators on the job doing things and accounting for the time they spent actually doign their job. No different, really, from filling out a logbook or a timesheet - except this one can't be faked. For an individual person, not using any of their employer's resources, it's a different story entirely. Your story here is a classic hit & run, happens every day.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[gnu-generation-one]

"In many industries, it's not hard to find replacements."

Apparently there's a concept of "barrier to entry" which many companies use to stop smaller comapnies competing with them.

In this case, the cost of a snowplow-equipped vehicle is non-trivial, and the vehicles are property of the drivers (typically taxi drivers who want extra work during the winter).

So in this particular case, the state is indeed screwed if their contractors don't like the new terms. I hope the mayor likes shovelling...

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is it the american view that employers can do whatever the hell they want during working time? If what you say is true, then why are there sexual harassement laws to limit what an employer can do at his workplace?

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[ipour]

No, the article says the issue is about the contractors carrying GPS cellphones. Like you I would have figured the vehicles, but since they are private contractors, I guess the state wouldn't want to pay for installing devices in trucks they didn't own.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Spoing]

The employer (which happens to be the state) wants to know if the employee is really doing the work (or as much of the work as) the employee claims.

Agreed. Hell, even I have my work tracked and audited regularly -- not by GPS but by memos, work performed, and errors and mistakes not found.

I don't fight it, I don't pass the blaim, though I do some CYA if the customers look hostile.

In the case of the truck drivers, they look to be happy with the current round of finger pointing and do not want the truth to come out; that some specific drivers screw up on occasion and sometimes maybe more often. I wouldn't doubt that both city and private contractors really think that they as a group would look bad if the details were known. Right now, the city doesn't know so they can't accuse individuals or groups.

1. What is stopping an individual without morals from claiming hit-and-run dammage and sending in a bill?

2. This GPS system would enforce this possibility since the city would be able to say a specific plow was near the 'accident' at the 'time it occured'.

The customer(s) I work for now aren't too hostile. The final customer in the food chain is unfortunately doing a poor job of auditing, so audits are both superficial, easy to pass, and at the same time pitiful and very very annoying.

In general, the auditing the final customer performs targets the wrong thing to audit. The audits are driven by whim and politics (politics with a big and a small "P").

They do emphasise procedures and the big picture (good), though they miss the details where the big picture really is enforced.

Often, this end customer shifts focus to what the latest shiny moving object is. If I were a deceptive person, it would be simple to distract them from real problems.

1. Point: On many contracts, the technical details are not examined and the results are taken on faith. The customers don't know where to look to dryly verify what they are being told.

2. They can't audit what they don't look at or know!

The GPS tracking is one way to know these types of details, though it is only one tool of many. It should be used though it will likely be abused, like any information. The lack of information now is leading to abuses now, so the trade off is probably worth it.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Spoing]

By similar reasoning, we should attach GPS trackers to each of our elected representatives, to ensure that we get what we pay for, and that they're doing the work they claim to be doing.

GPS wouldn't interest me. Cameras and microphones, though, might.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[srobring]

It's only a privacy issue if the plow operator isn't doing his job. The state already knows where the plow is (it's on the road). The GPS merely tells the state if it is at mile marker 1 or 20.

If I was an honest plow operator, I'd want the GPS. Not only would I feel like I'm making more efficient use of my time and making the streets safer, but I would also be getting additional work from all of the plow operators the state catches stealing time.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[STrinity]

This is not about tracking where I go after work, or if I visit my mistress for an extra-martial screw.

Unless you're a plow operator and you decide to light out for an afternoon-delight while on the job.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

As someone mentioned higher up the page- you have a switch that turns on the GPS when the plow goes down, and off when the plow goes up. Simple.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Skjellifetti]

If they purpose of unions is to lobby for a small group of workers at the expense of the people who pay them (taxpayers in this case) then HELL YES, people will be against them.

Another idiot who has never studied US history. Go read up on working conditions and pay rates for workers in the mining, steel, auto, and other industries from the start of the industrial revolution until the 1930s when much of the union legislation was finally passed. The industrial barons behaved like feudal lords and treated their employees like serfs. It wasn't unusual for the capitalists to convince the Govt to send in soldiers when the employees tried to form unions to do exactly what you say we would be against: lobby for better working conditions and pay rates.

If you can't do the government's work on the government's terms, you don't get the government's pay. And yes, this is a democratic notion.

"Yeah," says the employer, "here are our terms: You will work 18 hour days and will be paid $1 per day. And since the unemployment rate is so high, if you don't like those terms, we can always find someone else who will do the work for those terms." Sounds real democratic to me.

Unions are a democratic institution that provide an important check on the otherwise overwhelming power of those with access to capital to impose inhumane working conditions on those without access to capital. And history shows that the powerful will always try and impose their will on those without power in order to perpetuate that power. In this sense, governments as employers are no different than private employers.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[retromingent]

"In this case, the cost of a snowplow-equipped vehicle is non-trivial, and the vehicles are property of the drivers (typically taxi drivers who want extra work during the winter)."

Typically!! Boston cabs with snowplows? Ha ha... sorry, but that's preposterous. Typically, cabs are crazy busy for their entire 12 hour shifts when it's snowing transporting passengers. I drove cab in Boston for 8 years and the image of what you suggest just made my sides hurt from laughing. Thanks, I needed that.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless of course you are salaried, then your employer owns you all the time.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but the chance of getting congresscritters to pass that law is incredably low.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

And with that argument: there should be mandatory testing of school teachers, so those that are good are rewarded, and those that aren't aren't.

What do the two situations have in common? Unions.

The concept of a union is to help unite the workers into one group to provide better working conditions. Unfortunately, in the last 30 years, the unions only work for protecting the rights of workers to slack off without their bosses knowing. It's all about accountability, and if the bad employees were held to standards, they'd be asked to leave.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Only if they come with shock collars, too.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[black mariah]

In which case you should be fired for not doing your job. See the point now?

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

extra-martial screw.

First they were flying, now they are screwing.
Modern martial arts knows no bounds.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Belgand]

Perhaps, but the problem has arisen that unions are now monopolies on labor who more often than not have an overwhelming power over those who would hire them.

It's changed from "You'll work for 18 hours a day at $1 hour" to "We'll work 6 hours a day, but you'll pay us as if we worked 10, we'll also be making $20 hour and also provide us with all sorts of other benefits too. If you don't like it, we'll picket and harrass anyone else you do decide to hire and bemoan how much of a bastard you are for not giving in to our demands. If you try to hire someone else who isn't with us we'll walk as well."

Unions were certainly started with the best of intentions and many unions may still operate in that manner, but many have become little more than extortion rackets (mind you, some might be associated with organized crime, but I suspect that this is a very small minority) with more power than the employers.

In the past things may have been much worse for manual laborers, but in part due to unionization things have changed. The unions though, have changed as well and as you stated are using their power to perpeptuate itself well past the time when they were still necessary.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Belgand]

A slightly more telling portion shows up in the second article where it states that the minimums are being moved from 4 hours to 2 hours.

"Often, the state will call a contractor back out onto the roads to do some additional salting, which might take only an hour. Previously the contractor would have to be paid for four hours for one hour's work; now they will be paid a minimum two hours"

So now the plow drivers are being only slightly more overpaid rather than grossly and we'll be able to track them to be certain that they do their job (aside from the other benefits about dispatching and such). Makes sense that a few might be pissed off by it. It doesn't, however, follow that they're in any way correct.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Skjellifetti]

In the past things may have been much worse for manual laborers, but in part due to unionization things have changed. The unions though, have changed as well and as you stated are using their power to perpeptuate itself well past the time when they were still necessary.

Tell that to all of the IT and manufacturing workers who have lost their jobs due to outsourcing to low cost labor mkts. Today unions are working hard to make sure that globalization includes safeguards against sweatshops in underdeveloped countries. Nothing has changed. The folks with capital are doing the very same things in underdeveloped countries they did in the US 50-100 years ago and thereby causing the very same problems in both the developed and the underdeveloped countries for folks without access to capital. Unions are still very necessary.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[randyest]

Nice try, but poor results. No one said employers can do whatever they want, but they can certainly do anything legal that they want. Sexual harassment is a crime, as it well should be. Watching an employee to make sure he or she does his or her job is not a crime, nor should it be.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Rich0]

I can see some merit in the arugment of tracking so that they are accountable for hours reported working.

The post I replied to wanted tracability with regard to hit and run accidents involving snow plows. I simply replied that the same argument could apply to any hit-and-run.

My post was simply a direct quote of the one I replied to with a few words changed. I'm not saying that there is no reasons to put GPS trackers in plows. I am saying that this is NOT a valid reason.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[barzok]

Sure it is. If I'm paying you to do a job, then I can be held responsible for your actions while you're on the clock. If you perform a hit and run on your own time, that's your problem. Do it on my time, and it's my problem.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[PsiPsiStar]

I have read US history, you arrogant little shit. Just because I disagree with you, doesn't mean I'm stupid. You're not even addressing my argument. A lot of the union issues today are totally different from what happened 70 frigging years ago. It's those differences I oppose, and argued against in my comment, not the struggle for safer working conditions. GPS would actually make these workers jobs safer, but they're still opposing it.

If people want to unionize, fine. Does the company have the right to put workers in the bullpen or under lockdown like in the 1930s? Hell no! Does it have the right to fire the workers if they can't perform? Hell yes.

Representative government has absolutely nothing to do with the situation.
This is the government we're talking about, not a robber baron corporation. If I want a government employee to be paid more, I'll vote for it. If you really believe in democracy, I'm sure you'll love that notion.

If this was about working conditions, it'd be a different story. But you know what? It's not. Too many unions nowadays protect people who are incompetent and they often support promotions on the basis of years worked for the company rather than actual ability. Too many unions are against monitoring for the purpose of quality control. Why should I support this? I'd honestly like to know. Why should I support a union's struggle to not be monitored for the purpose of quality control while they're on the job?

I've worked for a company that did employee monitoring. Believe me, it was needed. A lot of people weren't doing their jobs. And any union who argues in favor of a person's right to not do their job is going to lose popular support real quick, regardless of what happened 70 years ago.

>And history shows that the powerful will always >try and impose their will on those without >power in order to perpetuate that power

And a lot of unions, the moment they get a bit of power themselves, have done just that. If someone can't do their job, they SHOULD be fired. If a union helps to insure quality of labor in addition to fighting for its members, I'll usually support it. What I can't stand is when a union stands behind someone who can't do the work, just because these people have worked at a particular company for a while.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

There are probably a lot of plowers who do side jobs for pay on the Commonwealth's dime - double dipping, as it were. GPS would help to prevent that.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Skjellifetti]

I have read US history, you arrogant little shit. .. If people want to unionize, fine. Does the company have the right to put workers in the bullpen or under lockdown like in the 1930s? Hell no! Does it have the right to fire the workers if they can't perform? Hell yes.

No, you pathetic pile of parrot droppings, you have NOT read US history or at the very least you did not learn anything from what little you did read. Just who will decide that those workers are not performing? The employer? That is just another way of letting the employer fire anyone who is trying to organize a union. All the employer has to say is that the employee wasn't working up to standard and no one is allowed to argue. This is why union rules make it tough to fire someone.

This is the government we're talking about, not a robber baron corporation. If I want a government employee to be paid more, I'll vote for it. If you really believe in democracy, I'm sure you'll love that notion.

An employer is an employer is an employer whether private or public. They do not care about their employees. They will pay as little as they can get away with, refuse to provide benefits, and ignore worker safety and health issues whenever they can. Off hand, I can think of several recent examples. The US Gov't refused to do anything about soldiers who contracted Gulf War Syndrome, or earlier, those who were dosed with Agent Orange in Vietnam. They ignored complaints from workers at DOE weapons facilities who were exposed to all kinds of nasty chemicals in order to make sure that we had a large stockpile of bombs. The Air Traffic Controllers who were fired by Reagan when they struck because they were concerned that unsafe working conditions could lead to an airplane disaster. There have been several recent incidents of cafeteria and secretarial workers at public universities who have gone on strike seeking a living wage. Teachers often have to go on strike in order to obtain decent wages and reasonable limits on the ratio of students to teachers. The list of public transgressions against their employees is quite lengthy.

A lot of the union issues today are totally different from what happened 70 frigging years ago.

No, they are not. They are most often the very same issues: worker health and safety and the right to a living wage.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Art Tatum]

We already have that: C-Span. What we have to face is the sad fact that a statistically low number of people care what politicians do so long as they get their social spending and handouts.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Rich0]

Uh - if I crash into somebody while driving a company car my company pays the bill - NOT ME.

Now, if I do this regularly the company might fire me or take away the car - but I'm never on the hook for the damages. I am a company representative and as such it is the company that got into the accident.

If the city wants drivers to assume full responsiblity for accidents they should pay more...

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

That is exactly the point! They are doing it so that they can know which of their plow operators did it so that the city can take some action against them Whether it be covering the costs out of their pocket isntead of the city or just firing them, the city can't take action against the driver if they don't know conclusively which truck did it.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Skjellifetti]

And just in time for this argument is an article in today's NYT about the Chinese company making the Etch-A-Sketch. Some telling quotes:

Today the same toy is made not just for lower wages, but also under significantly harsher working conditions. Kin Ki's workers, in fact, are struggling to obtain rights that their American predecessors at Ohio Art won early in the last century, though the workers are without the aid of independent unions, which remain illegal in China.

Kin Ki stays competitive, workers say, by paying them 24 cents an hour in Shenzhen, where the legal minimum wage is 33 cents. When the Etch A Sketch line shut down in Ohio just after the Christmas rush in 2000, wages for the unionized work force there had reached $9 an hour.

Chinese workers say the company also denies them legally required nonsalary benefits and compels them to work 84 hours a week, far more than the legal maximum, without required overtime pay.

High walls surround Kin Ki's production lines and warehouses. Dormitory windows are covered in chicken wire. Workers must enter and leave through the guarded front gate.

The factory, workers say, operates with the intensity of a military campaign. Production starts at 7:30 a.m., and, breaking only for lunch and dinner, continues until 10 p.m. Saturdays and Sundays are treated as normal workdays, so a work week consists of seven 12-hour days.

"Most of us would work long hours willingly if we were paid according to the law," said one employee. "The way things are now, we can shut up or leave."

Some workers took action against the factory last June and July, refusing to work unless the company raised wages. They also demanded that the daily diet of boiled vegetables, beans and rice be improved and supplemented more often with pork, fish or some other meat, which they say is served just twice a month.

The company responded by raising wages by a few cents a day, workers said. The canteen allotted each worker an extra dish each day, though no more meat.

But managers made "fried squid" of two workers they singled out as strike leaders, workers said, using a popular term for dismissals.

The company acknowledged having significant labor problems. "I know that I need to increase wages and to comply with the law," Mr. Tao said. "I have the intention of doing this and will raise all wages in 2004."

He also acknowledged that workers had gone on strike. But he denied that Kin Ki had dismissed the two ringleaders. He said they "were well known troublemakers" who left the factory of their own accord.

<sarcasm>Yeah right, Mr. Tao. Of course they left on their own accord.</sarcasm> This is a prime example of why independent unions are a necessity in both developed and developing countries. It also shows exactly why unions make it so hard for an employer to fire workers. This is one of the problems that unions in developed countries are trying to address by insisting that free trade and globalization include safeguards to protect both the rights of workers and the environment.

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Be glad that you are not getting all of the government that you are paying for!

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[roger_and_out]

"This is not about tracking where I go after work, or if I visit my mistress for an extra-martial screw."

Is this where you dress up in your general's uniform?

*

Re:This is contractual, not about privacy

[PsiPsiStar]

You're trying to change the subject from employee monitoring to different union issues like compensation and overtime because you know unions don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to fighting against on-the-job monitoring by employers. Just as employees have the right to get fair compensation for their work, employeers have the right to know that they're getting the quality and quantity of work that they paid for.

About the Money

[raisinets]

My Dad is one of the private contractors, and he tells me the problem is that most plowboys think GPS costs thousands of dollars. I keep telling him you can get decent GPS equipment for under a grand these days. J

Re:About the Money

[Anonymous Coward]

The article seems to suggest that the state is providing the GPS cellphones.

Re:About the Money

[Slashamatic]

A GPS/mobile combo, which permits tracking costs somewhat more. However, we are still talking about a grand rather than two.

Other aspect, if a plough driver gets into trouble (or comes across other people in trouble) - quite possible in a remote area with heavy drifting, the driver can get help.

Re:About the Money

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm, it sounds like the plow operators are just being uncool by trying to setup roadblocks to freeze out the authorities cold hearted plans ;-)

Re:About the Money

[FunnyBunny]

So the GPS unit is required equipment for doing business. Write the cost off as a business expense.

Re:About the Money

[spicedhamhawg]

According to the article, the phones are provided to the contractors by the state. Those refusing to carry them "rejected the contract and returned the GPS phones they had been issued." The cost of equipment was never an issue, since the operators are not and were not being asked to pay for the equipment.

Three things that are important issues are, first, that the contract, as worded, would have required them to pay a higher insurance premium, but the state claims they have fixed that.

The next is the 30-minute response time, however, it's unclear if that means 30 minutes to respond and say "I'll plow" or 30 minutes to be at the assembly point. It may be the latter, sine the article states that no one has been turned away for showing up late, because the foremen knew they were just stuck in traffic (incidentally, if you are carrying the phone and are stuck in traffic on the way to the assembly point, the GPS phone can prove it for you, which could be a good thing from the plow operator's point of view).

Third is the issue of only getting paid for two hours minimum if they are called up for work. The example the article cites concerns a person who gets called in for an extra hour of work. Under the former system, that operator would be compensated for four hours of work. Under the new rules, the compensation would be only two hours. I can see where this would be a sticking point, because if it takes you more than 30 minutes from the time you are called to get to the assembly point and get the plow, and more than 30 minutes to get home again afterwards, at only two hours of compensation it's hardly worth your time to show up, yet if you don't show up you likely won't get called anymore. At four hours, that is unlikely to happen, and they probably even make a tidy profit out of it.

Now, some people might object to that, but look at it this way: you are on hourly pay and your employer calls you up on Satuday morning, when you may already have something else you'd rather do (catching up on all the sleep you didn't get during the work week, maybe) and asks if you could come in for an hour to do something really important and says they'll pay you two hours' wages to do it. However, it takes you 45 minutes to drive to work (I live in LA, where most people go that long or longer, probably also true for most other big cities) and another 45 to get back. This doesn't even take into account the time to get ready, and the lost opportunity of whatever else you had planned to do.

How interested would you be? Probably not much. You might do it, either because you had to or because it would just look bad if you didn't, but you wouldn't like it much. However, if they were putting four hours' pay on the table and you were sure you could do the extra work in no more than two, it would be a good deal for you. In the worst case - it actually takes you four hours to get the work done - well, you've still made an extra four hours' pay, which is a much bigger incentive than only two hours' pay.

The plow operators don't know which battles to choose here. They should forget the GPS thing, which is not unreasonable and could improve everyone's safety, and focus on the other points. Those matter a lot more.

Re:About the Money

[Anonymous Coward]

Just FYI, writing off a business expense on your taxes does not make it free. It only means that you can potentially save tax dollars. The tax savings would be substantially less than the cost of the device.

And if you hardly make any money (because you don't get rich plowing snow), the savings can be even less.

Re:About the Money

[Belgand]

The second article stated that they were being issued the phones. I was under the impression that the state was providing the GPS phones for the contracters.

Re:About the Money

[FunnyBunny]

So pass the cost onto your customer.

Re:About the Money

[Anonymous Coward]

I keep telling him you can get decent GPS equipment for under a grand these days.

...in fact, around $100. Nice understatement.

Re:About the Money

[Anonymous Coward]

I write this sort of software for a living. Typically the ONLY ones who squeek about GPS and privacy are the ones who are doing something they REALLLLLLLLY shouldnt be doing.

In this case I would be willing to bet that they are saying they will do the work. Contract for it. Then never do the work. Or they are double contracting or something like that. GPS would make that OBVIOUS what is going on.

The others who do the job they are paid to do. Actually LIKE these sort of systems. As it gets them more work which they get paid for.

Like in the industry where I work. A driver has been making a run for 10 years. They put these boxes in. Suddenly a supervisor/dispatcher takes a look at where the driver has been going. They realize there is a 3hr on-duty time frame every day they are getting charged for. Yet its only a 20 minute drive. But the driver for the past 10 years has claimed traffic. The dispatcher then takes a look. The truck is off and parked somewhere. Hmm its a strip club off I-80. That driver has some explaining to do. Why is he 'on-duty' when he really is off?

Also your 'tired' thing is BS. Those dudes better be using the US DOT rules. Or they can have their license yanked. If they are tired they should not be driving, AT ALL. Unless they are ALL local drivers (unlikely). That is a matter of law.

In this case usually the ones who bitch the most need a good looking at. Or at least some of their buddies do. Ive seen it hundreds of times.

And we in the computer industry think we work some crazy hours. Truck drivers WORK so frekeing insane hours. 14-16 hour days 60-70 hours PER week. EVERY week all year.

Re:About the Money

[Follow the White Rab]

Seeing as you are from LA, I see why you don't totally understand the scenario.

While you raise some good points about the 2 hour minimum pay versus the 4 hour, I think your story is a little off. First, it would not take the average plow driver 45 minutes to get to work. In the city (Boston), most of the state highways are being plowed by state employees, not contractors. The contractors are used for suburban and rural areas. This is not L.A. During a snow storm when the roads are empty, a plow driver could get a 1/4 of the way across the state in 45 minutes. To get to a common assembly point, it probably would only take 15-20 minutes to get to the local point, if they are being required to meet a general assembly point.

Also, 2 hours of pay is no small chunck of change for the plow drivers. You made it sound like the average contractor is working a 40+ hour work week and then on top of that has to go plow for 2 hours. Unfortunately, up here in the bitter cold NorthEast, that is not the case. Most plow drivers are eagerly waiting for the first snow storm because it is their first chance to make any money since October. Many contract plow drivers are landscapers and construction workers. However, that is seasonal work which typically ends sometime in October. Their primary source of income over the winter is plowing. What else are they to do with their pick-ups all winter long?! But they are typically not working 40 hour weeks and then plowing. They are morer often working 0-20 hour weeks at a lower wage. Then the snow comes and they'll work 20 hours in a day if needed. And you mentiond getting double pay to come in on a Saturday. Try more like quadruple pay. I believe the hourly wages range between $80 and $200. Even at two hours of pay, I don't know many that will balk at $200 to drive their truck around, even on a Saturday morning when they could be sleeping. You talk to the average plow driver in Massachusetts, and they don't care if they are plowing from 5am til 1am. It's good money and the only money they get all winter.

I was personally elated to hear that the Commonwealth would be using GPS for the plow drivers. At the wage they ar getting paid, I want to make sure that my tax money is getting properly spent. While most drivers will not be effected, I do not like to see that small percentage of the contractors who try to take advantage of the system and steal my hard earned tax money.

In brief, less, none

[ciaran_o_riordan]

The latest seems to be that they have reached a compromise (no details yet)
...apparently it's about money as much as anything

Here's an interesting story about GPS, but details aren't available yet, and it's not actually about GPS (but I've written the first half of the story submission, so I'll just click Submit anyway.)

table of contents

What privacy concerns?

[jeeves99]

If you are being paid to plow a street, shouldn't the state be allowed to audit whether you've done the work or not? It seems that the only people who would/should be concerned here are those that are overcharging the state.

Oftentimes I find that the claims of "big brother" or misquotes of Orwell are made by those striving to protect their illicit activities.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[afidel]

You sound like the stupid British.

"If you have nothing to hide why should you mind constantly being monitored by big brother?"

Because us American's have a natural and benificial mistrust of big business and big government! I don't care that the probability of missuse is low I care that it is non-zero. Hell look at EZ-Pass, until they figured out that it would basically stillbirth the system and cost more in employee time and money, they wanted to automate tickets for people who went between tollbooths impossibly fast for the speedlimit. Basically the government should have to show a compelling need to implement things that could very easily invade peoples privacy, if the need isn't sufficient then the government should go jump in a lake.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[Riff10111]

There's a fairly big difference between what you do in public on your own time, and what you on the job , on your employer's time. If these people are being paid to do a specific job at a specific time, then they should expect that the boss is going to make sure they're earning their pay.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[ciaran_o_riordan]

us American's have a natural and benificial mistrust of big business and big government!

hahhhah *cough* PATRIOT ACT *cough* ahahaha
RIAA, MPAA, Bush, Haliburton, Enron, DMCA, Microsoft, etc. etc..

Re:What privacy concerns?

[BiggerIsBetter]

Because us American's have a natural and benificial mistrust of big business and big government!

Which is precisely why you don't have the largest companies and biggest government in the world.

Oh, wait...

Re:What privacy concerns?

[Ashe Tyrael]

You sound like the stupid British.

"If you have nothing to hide why should you mind constantly being monitored by big brother?"

I wonder what you've been reading. Nobody I know thinks that way, unless they are part of Big Brother, as it were.
Our mistrust of this kind of thing is probably about as big as yours. We just dont have as much recourse (no constitution, etc.)

The whole speedcameras debate shows what happens when peopel get up in arms about big brother.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[ottawanker]

If you are being paid to plow a street, shouldn't the state be allowed to audit whether you've done the work or not? It seems that the only people who would/should be concerned here are those that are overcharging the state. You are absolutely correct. The state should be able to audit whether you've done the work or not.. With say, routine monitoring of road conditions, a hotline for the public to call to complain about worse than average road conditions, etc.. They should NOT be able to track every move of an employee. For example, at work, I need a proximity security badge to get into some areas. This is not as much for monitoring my movements as for making sure I don't go into unauthorized places, etc.. (though they certainly can monitor my movement to an extent). They do not have badge readers at every door, or on the doors to the bathroom, etc.. If they did, I would complain about a lack of privacy.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[blankmange]

Normally, this sort of comment is made by an idiot. While you are at work your expectation of privacy, as far as your location, time spent doing your job and not doing your job, etc. are not privacy issues. Your expectation of privacy while at work is nil. Your email is monitored, your location is monitored, your output of work is monitored.

While you are not at work, your expectation of privacy is completely different, but then the issue would be moot -- the GPS system wouldn't be operating for these drivers.

So while you are on the job, at work, under contract, whatever, the simple fact is: you have no privacy.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[Weirsbaski]

If you are being paid to plow a street, shouldn't the state be allowed to audit whether you've done the work or not?

Can't they already tell by, say, looking at the street to see if it's plowed?

Re:What privacy concerns?

[mlyle]

Sure, but this is a pretty simple thing. It's GPS phones that just monitor where they are when they are supposedly plowing for the state. It's valuable information to have for administering the plow dispatch program, and it's valuable audit information to be sure the plow is actually moving, etc. Once the plow's up, they can turn off their phone and do what they please. I think this is perfectly reasonable information for an employer to have, and I would welcome my employer doing this, over, say, sending a supervisor out to watch and spot check me.

Just like those badge readers are probably used to spot-check verify time & attendance at your work, they're used for the same purpose by the state in managing plowing. They've no need to track when the employee goes to the bathroom or how many mistresses the employee has.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[silas_moeckel]

This is a contractual issue as much as anything else. There contract dosent state they have to allow this so they dont want to without further compensation for the aditional lack or atonomy. Trust in the fact this will allow people sitting in there comphy offices with MBA's decide that they can do it more efficiently and generaly mess the whole thing up then blame the contractors for poor performance. GPS monitoring of the personal should nto be allowed on priciple want to monitor the trucks fine assuming they own them not the contractors. I still fail to see what great benifit this will serve? Figuring out that in the middle of the nigh plow drives stop for coffee to often and thus the road to dunkin donuts/crispy cream is very well plowed? In my state a lot of the plow drivers have office jobs for the DOT often they are up for 20 hour or more when plowing it's realy not a fun job but it's extra money for those workers the contributes to there pention package.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[cailloux]

Indeed, this issue is occuring with greater frequency today than it was 5 years ago. My company does mobile data and part of the data we send is GPS location information. Much of the union and non-union labor (this isn't just an AFL/CIO issue) who drive a vehicle with a GPS installed don't like the idea. Until they find out why they have it.

A police department had GPSs installed in their vehicles as part of their computer dispatching system and the cops always grumbled that the chief could see where they were and that it wasn't right. Then one of the officers got shot on the job. He hit his panic button, the dispatcher (and every other cop on the city!) knew exactly where he was within 2 seconds. They got the bad guy (life in jail, what fun) and saved the one cop's life. Did they apso-positivly love GPS after that? Yeah, a lot.

And I can tell you similiar stories from the commercial sector, too. The point is that anyone will think it's intrusive until they see why there is a direct benefit to themselves as part of this system.

Consider this -- there are members of the Amateur Radio community that get excited by the prospect of sharing their position information on the internet. They can see a benefit.

Once you get beyond the "you're trying to screw me over" arguement, things get better and you just live with it. (As an aside, most union contracts specify that the company will dictate what equipment the employee will use, so there's not much to grieve about when you're driving a truck with a GPS in it).

Re:What privacy concerns?

[TyrranzzX]

I oftentimes find that people like you don't spend time thinking about weither or not it's a good thing that they do what they are doing. "It's orwellian is an excuse!" is what you say, only to find 50 years later you're in a slave labor, er, reeducation camp.

Giving them GPS will do 2 things; it'll complicate a already relativally simple job, and it'll allow the state legislature to nitpick where they don't need to be nitpicking. Whenever someone says "it'll save money" when talking about someone elses work, they're really talking about paying them less to get them to do more work. How about paying them more to do more work?

Re:What privacy concerns?

[afidel]

That's funny because NOTHING I do is monitored other than me reporting my work at the end of the day. If everything you do is being watched like that then I truely feel sorry for you. In fact in my last job I never met my boss face to face and in my current job I met him once when I was hired. Guess different people are willing to put up with different things.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[Anonymous Coward]

and what type of valuable work do you do - telecommute? independent contractor?

Re:What privacy concerns?

[perky]

Because us American's have a natural and benificial mistrust of big business and big government!

lol. and get rid of the apostrophe.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[drinkypoo]

The reason we have both a mistrust of large companies and a bounty (though that is not at all the right word IMO) of them at the same time is that our laziness exceeds our mistrust. Sure it would be better if we didn't patronize them, but they make things so cheap and easy! Pass me the doritos, I'm gonna make a bigger ass-dent in the couch if it gives me heart disease.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[randyest]

You're being silly. How, exactly, is an automatic GPS tracker more complicated (from a user standpoint) than writing down every street plowed and recording mileage?

Indeed, it may be about paying them less to get more work done, but only because the plowers currently lie (or make mistakes) about what they plowed when. It's an empirical fact -- they bust at least a few every year during the winters here near Boston. This isn't "nitpicking", it's stopping corrupt, illegal activity.

The bottom line is, the plowers agreed to the existing pay scale, knowing that they could pad their mileage to make it a sweeter deal. They began to count on this. Now, there's a cost-effective way to verify their work very accurately, and simultaneously remove the need to have the plowers spend any time at all recording and documenting. They aren't hapopy because thier pay will now revert to the original, agreed rate and they will indeed have to do all of the work that they claim they do to get paid.

This is the sort of trouble one gets into when one is dishonest. They should have negotiated for better pay, and then honestly reported their work. Instead, they assumed that technology would never create a speed bump for their gravy train. They were wrong.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[Anonymous Coward]

And who are they going to hire to drive down EVERY road in town, to make sure they are all plowed?

Re:What privacy concerns?

[instarx]

Your logic that all the state could tell would be that the road to Dunkin Donuts is plowed really well is looking at the problem backwards. Dispatchers would actually be able to tell that the roads the drivers were supposed to be plowing weren't plowed, and could dispatch an actual working driver to do it.

I am sure the drivers are compensated for the time spent plowing and not time spent in Dunkin Donuts. I strongly suspect the exact details of when they are and are not compensated (including reasonable breaks) are spelled out in the contract. Employers, including state governments, have the right to monitor performance of contractors based on the contract requirements and to audit invoices for accuracy.

So the drivers are up for 20 hours... so what? They're compensated for it. Just because they are up for 20 hours doesn't mean they should be paid for six hours of dunkin donut time

Don't get me wrong - I know it is a hard job, and thanks to all the operators who keep the roads clear. But there are a always a few people in any group who take advantage of any opportunity to cheat. Those few actaully make it more difficult for the working drivers who have to spend more time doing the cheater's work as well as their own. And let's not forget the danger to the public that the cheaters cause by not clearing the roads they should have cleared.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[silas_moeckel]

I agree that the state has the need to audit and some adutiting methods are probably spelled out in there contract this one obviously isnt and shouldent be allowed till it is if ever. Like I said going the cheap way out and just getting a cell phone to track the driver is an invasion of the drivers privacy. Track the vehical not the driver it's easy to do can be done in real time along with sending back all sorts of nice maitnence data perhaps even soem real time road data. Some states do the simple thing of installing radios and having the drivers report in.

Re:What privacy concerns?

[mlyle]

RTFA. This is a contract dispute. It is spelled out in their contract, and a few operators have refused to sign it.

The driver is free to turn off the GPS tracking on the cell phone when they're not on duty.

Privacy is a non-issue

[lewp]

They're being paid by the hour (and quite well, $42-$300 according to the article) and the government wants to make sure they're actually working while they're getting paid.

While I'm working I have a cell phone and two-way pager strapped to my hip at all times. It's my employer's business where I am when I should be working. I get my privacy back when I quit for the day and take those appliances off.

Work is not time to run the kids to school, run errands, or do anything besides work.

Of course this is hypocrisy on my part. I'm at work right now wasting time on Slashdot. That said, plow operators have seasonal jobs. If any of them wants to give up their $300/hr gig (several times what I currently make per hour), I'll gladly trade with them, work my ass off for a few months, and then screw around for the rest of the year.

Re:Privacy is a non-issue

[danheskett]

and then screw around for the rest of the year.
Umm.. no.

They mostly have other seasonal summer jobs.. like landscaping, truck driving, auto-repair (which in N.E. is a pretty seasonal gig actually), etc.

300/hr is great, but chances are, thats a handful of nights per season. Even if you make $1500-2000 grand for a night, you have to pay for the truck, the gas, the insurance, plus leave enough for you to live on.

It's not a bad deal, but still... its not work 10 nights a year have 355 off.

Re:Privacy is a non-issue

[lewp]

As I said, I could most likely live comfortably for the whole year off of the proceeds from a plow gig that paid $300/hr for a few months.

I'm sure most plow operators have other seasonal jobs. They likely have families, large mortgages, and other financial responsibilities that I don't have to deal with.

None of this was really the point of what I was saying, anyway. The last paragraph of my post was mainly to go ahead and get the "You're wasting company time on Slashdot, don't tell them how to work" argument out of the way.

Re:Privacy is a non-issue

[Anonymous Coward]

As I said, I could most likely live comfortably for the whole year off of the proceeds from a plow gig that paid $300/hr for a few months.

What part of common sense do you not understand? It is not $300/hr 40 hr/wk all winter. Many weeks right in the dead of winter, you do not have any plowing to do. Bad snow weeks, you might have 20-30 hours per week.

I think you would be correct to say that there aren't any snowplow operators who need no other job, even during the winter.

Re:Privacy is a non-issue

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess I'm missing the part of "common sense" where $300*20 (on a "bad snow week") isn't adequate.

That's still $150/hr if you divide it up over 40 hours. That's roughly ten times more than I was paid at my first full time job, and I lived on that comfortably for a year in an expensive apartment in the middle of a major city. I also drove a brand new car and still managed to pack away some cash in the bank.

Do I make a hell of a lot more than that now? Yes. Would I be willing to go back to that lifestyle, or even a bit less, in exchange for 6-9 months of total freedom every year? Most days I think I'd say yes.

But, like I said, this wasn't the point.

Re:Privacy is a non-issue

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Too many full-time employees don't seem to be able to grasp the nature of contractual work and thus think contract workers are a bunch of over-paid good for nothings. But when the income is unpredictable you have to make up for the downtime in your base rate. $3oo/hr for 5o hours a month for 4 months out of the year is only $6oK and that is before tax, before cost of equipment, maintainence and supplies. Then realize that very few plowmen earn $3oo/hr and that cost of living in a state like Mass is relatively high compared to most of the country (it ain't silly valley, but it sure ain't Oky City either).

Then apply the fact that they have to be on call 24-7 during those months which limits what other jobs they can take as well as makes life generally difficult because of the extra restrictions put that maintaining that level of availability.

Seems to me that this GPS stuff is an attempt to squeeze blood from a stone. Out of 4 winters in MA, I've only experienced a lack of plowing for a couple of weeks at the end of a winter when the local town ran out of budget to pay for plowers. Otherwise all the streets that I regularly travel have always been plowed in a timely fashion. So, I say that as long as the results are good, then micromanaging the driver's movements will only prove useful as a tool for firing drivers that management has a beef with and not for real incompetence or the like.

Re:Privacy is a non-issue

[rmohr02]

Yea--I would have to say they might get $300/hr when it's Christmas morning (thus, holiday pay), and they've already worked enough time that week to get to triple+ overtime.

Re:Privacy is a non-issue

[dinivin]

They're being paid by the hour (and quite well, $42-$300 according to the article) and the government wants to make sure they're actually working while they're getting paid.

And how does this make sure they're doing the work? All it does is make sure they're driving around.

Dinivin

Re:Privacy is a non-issue

[Anonymous Coward]

"Doing the work" consists of lowering the plow and having the truck actually push snow out of the way. How is this significantly more arduous, from the driver's perspective, than just driving around? What would be the point, from the driver's perspective, of driving around without the plow lowered?

Re:Privacy is a non-issue

[Anonymous Coward]

Save gas, and reduce wear and tear on the vehicle?

Re:Privacy is a non-issue

[Anonymous Coward]

Drive around on the same street, over and over, that either yourself or your friends have already plowed (and hence a nice Sunday ride instead of doing any work). Quite common around here, none of our side streets ever get plowed

Re:Privacy is a non-issue

[randyest]

It not only makes sure they're driving around, it also knows when the plow is up or down. If they are driving, and they plow is down, they are doing the work.

Re:Privacy is a non-issue

[tbuskey]

Massachusetts doesn't pay the operators until 6 months to a year later. My bother in law does plowing & sanding. It fits in nicely with his real job (masonry) because he can't do that when there's a heavy snow. I doubt he gets more then $10k per year from it. Most operators don't do the sanding & get called out *much* less often.

Last year (or year before) there wasn't much snow & many operators had to sell thier plows because they were idle all winter.

It's *not* something you do to earn money you need. You do it to get some mad money.

I don't get it

[venicebeach]

It's not clear from either of these stories 1) why the highway department wants them to have GPS, nor 2) why the contractors don't want to have it.

Are they planning some huge NORAD-like control room with huge screens and little dots for all the snowplows?

Are they having a problem with the drivers taking off time to make snow-angels? I don't get it.

Re:I don't get it

[phalse phace]

Are you sure you read the article because it clearly answers the questions you've just asked.

1) why the highway department wants them to have GPS

They want them to carry the GPS systems so they can "track their movements and record the work that they should be paid for" since they're paid "between $42 and $300 an hour."

2) why the contractors don't want to have it.

They don't want to carry them because of "the difficulty of operating the GPS phones while driving," and because if contractors don't "punch a code into the GPS phones and that if it is not done properly, the contractor won't get paid."

I, however, think the contractors don't want the GPS units because they'll no longer be able to slack off and milk the state. I mean, what do they have to hide. They are being paid by the state to do a job. Therefore, the state should have the right to track them and make sure they're doing exactly what they're being paid to do.

Re:I don't get it

[bourne]

Are they having a problem with the drivers taking off time to make snow-angels? I don't get it.

I think they're worried about:

• Excessive breaks
• Plowing driveways for personal profit while being paid to plow state roads
• Reporting as plowing while snuggled up in bed
• Assessing plow coverage in real-time (probably not right away, but eventually) so they can retarget plows for better coverage.

The plower's union has complained that it will be "dangerous" to put this "attention-stealing" gadget in their trucks. Since they only use it at the start and stop of the shift, or if they get a call, the only people who I think qualify for that complaint are the truckers with no cell phones and no radios already in their truck.

One of the government folks said, and I paraphrase, "I used to assume there was about 10% loss in the system. I'm starting to think, from the reaction that this is getting, that it must be a lot higher than that." I think he's probably right.

editors are no more likely to rtfa than readers?

[fw3]

Neither article mentions boo about safety or privacy.

As already pointed out, this is entirely about an attempt to control cost, providing the contractors a tool to measure miles.

Given the task of monitoring the routes covered by a thousand contractors' trucks it sounds like a decent solution too.

Yes I live in boston, and we're about to get hammered by a predicted 16"+ of snow. Oh joy

What are they worried about?

[YoungBonzi]

Do they drive their plows on vacation trips with the family? It's not like truckers carrying missles or hazardous materials take their rigs on vacation. And even if they do, I'm sure there's a way to turn off the system when they're off duty.

It's not tracking the people...

[cperciva]

It's tracking the plows. The government may not have the right to track where people go, but surely it has a right to track where government property goes.

This is nothing more than employees getting irate about losing their unofficial extended coffee breaks.

Re:It's not tracking the people...

[Anonymous Coward]

Bzzt. It's not government property. They are NOT tracking government plows, only the privately owned ones.

Getting tired of this?

[Hackie_Chan]

Or is this simply a step closer to an Orwellian society, where the State knows where we all are?

Am I the only one that's getting tired of these comments? What Slashdotters need to do is to seperate fiction from facts and weed out the conspiracies. Preaching death of the world we know it is fun and all, but every little thing in the news isn't a sign of it. Calm down, guys. Okay?

Trust me, this is a good thing!

[twoslice]

Up in Canada we know a thing or two about snow. Hey we do all live in igloos up here, don't you know ;)

The problem is we sub-contracted most of the snow removal jobs to the lowest bidder. Yup you guessed it, the lowest bidder was Jeff and Ackbar's shovel your driveway/interstate business.

A few winters ago, I was driving through a major snowstorm with about 8-10 inches of snow on the highway. I drove for over 150 kilometers and saw only one snowplow. And guess what he was doing?

He was parked on the side of the road drinking a coffee and taking a really long break. How do I know this? That was the funniest part, the snow was just as deep infront of him as it was behind him. He must have been sitting there quite awhile.

Re:Trust me, this is a good thing!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes but isn't drinking coffee a constitutional right in Canada? Along with the guarantee that every Canadian citizen shall not have to walk more than two blocks before encountering a Tim Hortons?

Re:Trust me, this is a good thing!

[ottawanker]

A few winters ago, I was driving through a major snowstorm with about 8-10 inches of snow on the highway. I drove for over 150 kilometers and saw only one snowplow.

That's just part of the charm of living in Canada. Hell, in the prairies theres hardly any point in plowing anyways, because as soon as they plow, the wind blows it all (and more) back onto the highway.

Re:Trust me, this is a good thing!

[rmohr02]

In the US, or at least where I live, several "concerned citizens" would have called in and reported this truck. But in a snowstorm in the US, you'll probably see several trucks over a span of 150 miles.

Re:Trust me, this is a good thing!

[/dev/trash]

So he should work 24 hours a day and take no breaks?

Took a few seconds...

[Space cowboy]

... for me to realise y'all meant snow-ploughs. Haven't seen one for over a decade, and initially thought there was some farmer ploughing his neighbours fields without permission...

Simon

Re:Took a few seconds...

[ewithrow]

If you had RTFA you would have noticed that the first word is "snow" ;)

Re:Took a few seconds...

[Space cowboy]

Mmm. It was more a comment on the /. headline than the story per se. Wasn't really interested in the story, 'cos we don't use snow-ploughs. I'm sure we have them, and I'm sure the Welsh and Scots use them, but it's not really a London thing, old bean :-)

Simon.

Re:Took a few seconds...

[gnuLNX]

LOL! Being from Mississippi and now living in NY I can appreciate that!

GPS Phones provided?

[Anonymous Coward]

it seems like the main complaints actually have nothing to do with the GPS phones, according to the earlier story. They are talking about decreasing the time that plowers have to get to a work call, making them more liable for the roads they plow, and decreasing the minimum (I worked a half hour but u have to pay me my minimum charge of 2 hours) to 2 hours instead of four. They are also complaining about threats to their jobs by employing out-of-town plowers (the in town plowers say that experience matters, they know the "hot spots"). Only once did they barely mention that the GPS Phones are cumbersome and it even seems like thge government supplies the phones. Am I wrong? Personally, I think they should take the phones and learn how to use them, and as for minimums, the only reason they're complaining is because they're used to being paid for more than they did work for. I can see getting paid a little extra for the inconvenience of having to stop what you're doing and drive out to plow for a little, but four hours pay of at least 42$ an hour for an hours work? I wish I could get paid 21$ an hour for one hours work, 42$ seems good, especially that being the minimum (300$/h max) This is why unions are just misuse of power, they extort companies and get more money than actual work worth. And people wonder why jobs get outsourced. Demand to be paid for what your work is worth! Not for more more more, it causes inflation and spreads the classes farther apart (few rich, tons of poor). Why are we all sooooo greedy?

Re:GPS Phones provided?

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me introduce you to the paragraph

It

makes

reading

much

easier!

Re:GPS Phones provided?

[stephenbooth]

This is why unions are just misuse of power, they extort companies and get more money than actual work worth.

I've heard some unions in the US are pretty bad for that but I don't think it's true of all unions, and certainly not many in the UK. I'm a union shop steward and I spend most of my Union time protecting members basic rights and pointing out when managers are breaking the law or going against their own written procedures. Sometimes you do have to do things and represent people that you'd rather not but when it comes down to it if you let management get away with an abuse against someone you don't like or has done something wrong then it weakens your case when they try the same thing against someone who is innocent. It's like if the Federal Government breach an ammendment to secure a conviction against a paedophile then the ACLU has to defend the paedophile, not because they want to defend paedophiles but because they have to defend the bill of rights. If the ACLU let them get away with it once then it weakens their arguement in all other cases.

Unionisation can work well for both employers and the employed as it gives a forum for the raising of grievences and for negotiation. It also means that individual managers often have someone around who is knowedgable about the procedures and can advise them (most of the queries about procedures I get are from managers as they individually probably only have to apply many of them once every few years but I am constantly involved in them so can tell the managers (many of whom are also union members) how those procedures work).

As a shop steward I will campaign for fair pay, people doing the same job to the same level should be paid the same; equiable treatment, no one should be refused promotion or subject to harsher disapline simply becuase of their race, gender, faith or simply because their manager doesn't like them; safe working practices, we have laws about health and safety in the workplace thsat managers should follow. What I will oppose is people being paid for more than their labour or worth. Having said that I do support minimum time payments for 'call out staff'. I've sure that any of us who have done 'call out' work will have at least once had a call where we've had to go into the office/data centre or whatever and the time it took to actually do the job was so short that it would cost us more in gas to go in than we would get paid. But I think one to two hours would be reasonable, four hours (unless there's a good reason) seems a bit excessive to me.

On the subject of the story the way I figure it is that if I'm at work then my employer has a right to know what I'm doing and where I am. As soon as I clock out that right ceases.

Stephen

Re:GPS Phones provided?

[Peeet]

i can't beleive i said "unions are a misuse of power" I usually go by the rule "never say never, always say sometimes", but you are right, Unions are a double edged sword/mixed blessing. I wholeheartedly agree that unions are necessary, or should I say the idea of unions are necessary. The idea of centralization for the people, the "underdogs" is needed because companies that employ union workers are by nature, already centralized. Workers need to be able to react to their manager's actions as quickly as possible so that managers don't take advantage. I come from the theater/stagehand business and unions here are more or less a pain. Especially in south-western Ohio where the IATSE is decentralized (independent from the rest of the world's IATSE) and therefor, making it impossible for workers that have gained their 4 years of experience in this union to go to any other union. There was a Steward who came to our theater school and tried to give a speech on unions and practically got shot down on the stage while answering questions because they basically say, regardless of how much time you have spent in college, u start out at the same pay level if you're a high school drop out or a college grad from a highly accredited tech theater school. That enraged the crowd because the union does not take into consideration the hard work that we have all put into college. It's "good old boy" unions like these that can sometimes cause problems. Sometimes I forget, after trying to work with IATSE that there are actual good normal unions out there serving their purpose. -P

Re:GPS Phones provided?

[RayBender]

I've heard some unions in the US are pretty bad for that but I don't think it's true of all unions, and certainly not many in the UK.

Absolutely. Unions can definitely be a good thing, improving working conditions and pay. In fact, one could argue that without unions there would never have been a middle class; just a few ultra-rich capitalists, and zillions of working poor.

The problem with unions in the U.S. is mostly one of history - unions never really became a mass movement ("the American Dream": everyone thinks they are going to end up on top someday, and they want to be able to exploit everyone else when they do), employers never accepted unions, except in very limited situations when/where they were forced to, and unions only thrived in positions where they could effectively strangle businesses (garbage pickup, longshoremen, auto-manufacturing), creating a lot of inconvenience for everyone else in the process. Those unions concentrated on making a small number of their own rather wealthy, rather than expanding. The result is that unions are small and unpopular. Couple this with the particular history of organized crime and unions and they ended up with a serious image problem. To most people in the States "union" connotes a bunch of overpaid, underworked fat guys standing around on break, who you can't join unless you know uncle Tony. To most Swedes, "union" means those people who speak up for you if your workplace isn't safe.

Re:GPS Phones provided?

[ljavelin]

This is why unions are just misuse of power, they extort companies and get more money than actual work worth. And people wonder why jobs get outsourced. Demand to be paid for what your work is worth! Not for more more more, it causes inflation and spreads the classes far

This isn't a union... these are outsourced jobs... outsourced mostly to small companies. My Uncle owns one of these outfits - basically, he owns 5 trucks and hires 4 drivers (plus himself).

The trucks are pretty huge - they cost well over $70,000 and require a lot of insurance and maintenence and tons of fuel.

I'd love $300/hour too. Then again, there aren't too many hours a year to use the equipment. If you plow for 250 hours in a year, and your truck costs $270/hour to own and operate and depreciate, that's not much additional income.

That's why virtually all plowboys have day jobs too. It's a crappy job. If you think it's such an incredibly high profit opportunity, then you should buy a truck and get a contract.

Re:GPS Phones provided?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a crappy job. If you think it's such an incredibly high profit opportunity, then you should buy a truck and get a contract.

If it's such a crappy job, why do people do it?

Re:GPS Phones provided?

[ljavelin]

A lot of the guys who work for my Uncle do it because they need a little extra income to pay the bills.

How difficult to use?

[mcrbids]

I have a new cell phone, a freebie given to me by Verizon Wireless when I renewed my contract. I didn't even notice that it was GPS capable until it was pointed out to me be somebody else.

Apparently, if I call 911, they know within 50 feet or so where I am, unless I disable the GPS feature.

So, how hard could it be? Are we talking rocket science, or people bitching for the sake of bitching?

Re:How difficult to use?

[Slashamatic]

Is it actually GPS, or just trackable by triangulation from the base stations? There are GPS phones around but they are still relatively expensive. If it was GPS enabled, then they would know where you are down to a couple of feet.

Re:How difficult to use?

[Dun Malg]

Is it actually GPS, or just trackable by triangulation from the base stations? There are GPS phones around but they are still relatively expensive.

Actually, GPS is showing up in cheaper phones now. I have a Nextel i58sr with GPS and I got it for under $150. Mind you it's not very useful GPS-- antenna is inside the back of the phone, satellite acquisition takes forever, it gives your LAT-LON location and nothing else, and it only does it when you specifically go three menus deep and select "get my GPS location" (or, presumably, when I dial 911). Full featured GPS in a phone will cost you, I'm sure, but full featured GPS by itself can be pretty pricey compared to cell phones.

Re:How difficult to use?

[Slashamatic]

There was a really neet unit from a Finnish company, Benefon (the other less well known Finnish mobile manufacturer) which combined some higher functionality, i.e. with two phones, how do I get to phone A's current position from Phone B. That could be quite useful, but cost about 730 Euros a piece without a contract. They have come down since last time I looked. Actually, the equivalent handheld GPS would probably cost about 2-300 Eur. The problem is that GPS is relatively high drain, and it has problems between high buildings or in deep/narrow valleys. If you can 'see' a GSM/PCS station, it knows which sector you are in and has a range.

The company even have a device for dog tracking. Apparently, many Finns are avid hunters but those pine forests are dense and dogs can get lost, they can get several km away.

Mr. Plow

[Fubar411]

would never put up with this type of thing.

Re:Mr. Plow

[Dominic_Mazzoni]

(Call) Mr. Plow.
That's my name!
That name again is Mr. Plow.

Plow King

[Anonymous Coward]

"Call Mr. Plow, that's my name! That name again is Mr. Plow."(wav)

Warning: michael is a typical slashdot editor...

[Anonymous Coward]

Presumably plowing could be more efficient and possibly save lives during storms if the trucks could be tracked.. a good thing.

Why? ...Why? Because of GPS? Explain!

company cell

[tomstdenis]

If this is a cell that stays in the plow.... oh too fucking bad. It's a job. Your boss wants to make sure you're doing it. Get over it.

It would be a different issue if the plow drivers had to have GPS installed on their personal cell phones but this is probably not the case.

You'd think in a world where unemployement is such a problem people wouldn't bitch and whine over the trivials like this. I'm mean you're on the job. Your location is not private anyways [because you're supposed to follow a route]. The mgmt just wants to make sure you do the work.

Tom

Re:company cell

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFA. It is not a privacy issue. The article says that the main complaints are that the GPS system is hard to use and that the state wants to bill based on this unproven system. The state doesn't want to use GPS to verify a contractors paperwork, they want to replace the paperwork.

Re:company cell

[Highlander]

I think it would be more appropriate to call it a "customer cell" not a company cell. The plow drivers in question are contractors for the state, not employees.

Re:company cell

[Anonymous Coward]

Listen to Tom. He should know. This is the same rationalization he uses when his boss forces him to suck him off as part of his job requirements.

Why not compromise?

[Lord Kano]

Outfit the trucks with GPS equipment that the driver can turn off when he's done working?

I mean, sure when the driver is off of the clock what he does is his own business. But when he is on the clock, getting paid the money of the taxpayers, it is not unreasonable to expect him to account for all of that time. Is he really working, or is he "visiting" with his girlfriend?

LK

Re:Why not compromise?

[bourne]

Outfit the trucks with GPS equipment that the driver can turn off when he's done working?

The linked articles don't state that, but in fact, that's how it works.

Dial in to "punch the clock" as on duty. Dial again to "punch the clock" to go off duty. Leave it sitting on the dashboard for the rest of the shift. No tracking when not punched in.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Management issue

[Slashamatic]

Unlike rain which usually comes down relatively evenly over an area, snow doesn't. It blows around and some areas get much more than others. Knowing where there are problems with drifting and where the ploughs are, allows the highways dept to put the two together more effectively.

This is as much the case as the Time and Motion aspect.

Re:Management issue

[ottawanker]

Unlike rain which usually comes down relatively evenly over an area, snow doesn't. It blows around and some areas get much more than others. Knowing where there are problems with drifting and where the ploughs are, allows the highways dept to put the two together more effectively.

How does GPS address this issue? Does the GPS somehow record how much snow is on the ground? A plow operator is most likely going to do a whole section of road (especially if they're salting, etc..) and not just the worst areas. It might provide you with a little bit of information on the worst areas, but how do you know whether the problem is snow, ice, a missed area, etc..?

Re:Management issue

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you are missing what he is saying. The information on how bad the roads are would come from the Truckers themselves and civilians complaining. GPS doesn't fix that.

What it does fix however would be to give the city an idea where each plow is so they can pull someone close of a less important route onto the needed on. It would also prevent redundancy and waste since it gives a proper overview of where everyone is and managers could re-route vehicles on a just in time basis.

Re:Management issue

[Anonymous Coward]

What it does fix however would be to give the city an idea where each plow is so they can pull someone close of a less important route onto the needed on. It would also prevent redundancy and waste since it gives a proper overview of where everyone is and managers could re-route vehicles on a just in time basis. Can't they do this already with a CB Radio, much like they used to with Taxis/Police, etc.? I can't see this scenario happening often enough to make it worthwhile, but I suppose you have to look at all the benefits together, and not just the one.

Re:Management issue

[Slashamatic]

No the idea is that someone notices a particularly bad area, typically police. They call in and you can see which equipment is nearby and radio them to see if they can help out. They may not be but at least you have an idea.

A snow-plough route may be somewhat long and it may be a problem to ascertain where a particular operator is at a given point in time. Even with the best possible intetion, a schedule can vary a lot because of conditions. Having radio control (ie. comms *and* position) allows the best use of equipment and allows for reports of conditions to be instantly linked to location.

Re:Management issue

[KyolFrilander]

Yeah, around here it's not terribly uncommon to see a plow cruising down side streets merrily clearing them for the light traffic those roads see, and completely ignoring the still-covered arterials.

If my boss did this,

[reboot246]

I'd find a way to remove the tracking device and attach it to a taxi, a bus, or a police car. I don't operate a snow plow, but I am in a company truck all day.

Re:If my boss did this,

[danheskett]

..and hopefully they'd find a way to remove you from the job.

Re:If my boss did this,

[andih8u]

Yeah, you hardly see any of the three of those sitting for long periods of time.

Re:If my boss did this,

[Pedersen]

And I can guarantee that I'd fire you within minutes of finding out about it. We're about to install these at work, and we have some very good reasons for doing so.

1. During the day we get emergency calls. Now, we don't have to ask the installers where they are, we can simply call the right one and get him to the emergency service call.
2. We have at least one installer that we know is stealing from us, but due to lack of tracking in every aspect of the business, can't prove it. This will help us do just that.
3. We have chronic issues with our installers leaving the job without collecting the money they've been told to collect. Since this will tell us when they start the car (in nearly realtime) we can go over things with them as they're pulling out of the driveway, and re-instruct them to get the damned money.
4. We have several installers who falsify their timesheets, but we are (again) unable to prove it. They are all supposed to be at the job sites from 7AM to 3:30PM, and they tend to arrive late and leave early. This will let us catch the ones doing this (and I don't mean arrive a 7:05, leave at 3:25, I mean arrive at 8AM, and leave at 2:45).

So, if you disabled it and were working for me, with all of those issues, I'd fire you over the phone as soon as I caught you. And I would catch you quickly, since I'd know where you're supposed to be, and that bus/taxi/whatever wouldn't be anywhere's near there.

Re:If my boss did this,

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes Sir. I picked up your wife's dry cleaning, dropped off that cash across town and helped your brother move. Can I go home now?

Re:If my boss did this,

[circusnews]

A friend of mine owns a pest control company. His company has over 25 vehicles on the road at any time.

A few years ago his insurance company offered him a very large break on his various insurance policies for 5 years if he could do real time tracking and could document where the vehicles were 24/7 (the savings the first year paid for the GPS systems). We installed some very nice GPS boxes. Every 7 seconds these boxes take a reading. They tell us within 25 feet where the trucks are, the trucks speed, miles and more. We could upgrade the boxes with terminals to allow for fully computerised records. We even tried using this system to track employee hours.

You know what we found? Productivity dropped, quality dropped, employee satisfaction dropped, and revenue dropped.

When we stared to look at why, we discovered the following:

1. Less employee down time. That extra 5 minutes techs may take to 'wind down' after a tough call was not their, bringing down the overall quality of service. For comparison, office workers could take a walk to the watter bubbler after a tough call.
2. More fights between the office and techs. Office staff began to think that it was their job to keep the techs going %100 of the time. This led to fights between the office staff (specificly those that answer the phones) and the techs.
3. The techs spent less time cleaning / organizing their trucks, making the rest of their service time less efficient. Consiquently, they often did not have everything they needed to service a call.
4. The techs spent less time doing their jobs, and more time going from site to site. Things that should have been done the first time ended up being done on an extra trip back.
5. Techs were not willing to work as many hours as they had been. During season some of the best employees would work as many as 90 hours a week. This would include taking (company sanctioned) naps on the job from time to time. with the new system they would not take naps, and then would not be willing to work nearly as many hours.
6. The company almost lost a number of very good people over all of this. You know what he ended up doing? He stopped using the data on a day to day basis. Paper work is again filled out by hand and time cards are back in use. The data is still collected, it is still used if a customer calls up and says "Your guy never came", but it is not used to track real time positions, its not used for day to day accounting, or anything else like that. It's just not worth it.

Re:If my boss did this,

[Artifakt]

Yes, but you're not a pointy haired idiot. (Sorry if that compromises your career). One reason the union seems upset about this is the state official who might try to enforce that 30 min. arrival widow at the rally point, by doing just the equivalent of meaning arrive at 7:05 instead of 7:00.
I'll assume your definition of emergency service calls is properly related to your customers, as well. One problem with the state doing this is everyone counts as a customer, for every service the state provides. Would you use the GPS to check whether one of your installers just might have been in a location where they were witness to a crime, and include whether they were sufficiently cooperative with police in their quarterly performance review? (or whatever you use).

Re:If my boss did this,

[Vee Ecks]

"..and hopefully they'd find a way to remove you from the job."

That wouldn't be hard, considering that the now-misplaced GPS locator would be everywhere you weren't supposed to be all day.

Yeah, that's a great idea...

Re:If my boss did this,

[Vee Ecks]

On a related note, a few years back I worked as the UI guy for (big giant anti-virus company), and at one point, we got an off-the-record heads-up in my dept that the VP in charge of the division had installed tracking software and was going to be monitoring web usage for all employees and posting lists of the biggest time-wasters weekly.

Not one list ever went up. Try and figure out why.

Re:If my boss did this,

[jesdynf]

You know what we found? Productivity dropped, quality dropped, employee satisfaction dropped, and revenue
dropped.

... so the tool is at fault because you used it wrong? Jesus.

Re:If my boss did this,

[Anonymous Coward]

And you'd be fired without benefits and possibly sued for tampering with company equipment. Smart move.

Re:If my boss did this,

[reboot246]

Actually, in my line of work, nobody knows where I'm supposed to be. I work all over town, sometimes moving and sometimes sitting in one place for a long time. The ideal vehicle to attach the tracking device to would be one that mimics my movements. As long as it didn't leave the city nobody would be the wiser.

I do know that if my boss ever gets the brilliant idea of using the damned things, he won't have to fire me - I'd quit. I'm not a slacker; I do a full day's work for a full day's pay. I'm opposed to anybody knowing where I am all the time. As long I get the work done that has to be done, how I go about it and what pace I set is my own business.

We have some employees who work like hell for four days, doing more than is required each day. Then they can goof off on Fridays. They've done exactly what was required for them to do in a week. Nobody has ever complained.

For some jobs we do, we're given 2 to 3 times as much time as it really takes to complete, so sometimes I get way ahead. I've even told my boss that if I get ahead, don't be surprised to find me at CompUSA. He just laughed and said make the job fit the hours we're given to do it - no more, no less.

Re:If my boss did this,

[Anonymous Coward]

You know what we found? Productivity dropped, quality dropped, employee satisfaction dropped, and revenue dropped.

When we stared to look at why, we discovered the following:

Less employee down time. That extra 5 minutes techs may take to 'wind down' after a tough call was not their, bringing down the overall quality of service. For comparison, office workers could take a walk to the watter bubbler after a tough call.


And the exterminators can sit in the van for 5 minutes before moving on to his/her next call.

More fights between the office and techs. Office staff began to think that it was their job to keep the techs going %100 of the time.

Um, it is. Having 'techs' sitting there, doing nothing is wastefull and bad business practice.

The techs spent less time cleaning / organizing their trucks, making the rest of their service time less efficient. Consiquently, they often did not have everything they needed to service a call.

Again, they can 'clean' for a few minutes at the end of each call. They just report the call too 2 hours and 10 minutes instead of 2 hours. What's the problem?

The techs spent less time doing their jobs, and more time going from site to site. [But less time napping, see below!] Things that should have been done the first time ended up being done on an extra trip back.

And this is the fault of the tracking how?

Techs were not willing to work as many hours as they had been. During season some of the best employees would work as many as 90 hours a week. This would include taking (company sanctioned) naps on the job from time to time.


Napping ain't "working". They are paid to work, not nap. And if they are paid to nap (you said "company sanctioned"), then time for napping would be build into their schedules.

with the new system they would not take naps, and then would not be willing to work nearly as many hours

THEY WEREN'T WORKING THOSE HOURS!! THEY WERE NAPPING!!! You said so yourself.

Sheesh.

The company almost lost a number of very good people over all of this

Yeah, well, the company wanted the 'techs' to do their jobs and then stopped paying the employees to nap. I can see why people would threaten to quit.

Re:If my boss did this,

[circusnews]

My point was not that the tool is at fault, but that that it is far to easy to misuse this tool, and that such misuse can, and often does work against the goals that are so often sighted as the reason for installing them in the first place.

Look, if these tools are to be used in the workplace sucesfully (and I stress sucesfully), then standards need to be adapted as to what is acceptable, and what is not. Right now the GPS companies (at least all of the ones I have dealt with) do nothing in the way of helping companies develop workable standards for useing this tool (YMMV). Nor do I know of any *fair* standards to use as models.

I live in the Boston area. I have to go out on the roads shortly, so I have an actual stake in these roads being cleared. With that said, I have to side with the plow operators. What has been proposed for this contract includes provisions and procedures that are far worse than what happened with my friends pest control company.

Phone die? It take you an hour of plowing before you could get a replacement batery? Oh well, not only do you lose your pay for that time, but all of the time you have worked so far that you have not been paid for. Don't like it? Too bad, because their is not any greviance policy.

No, the tool is not the problem, its the misuse of the tool that creates the problem.

OT:GPS and agricultural machinery

[Slashamatic]

There are plenty of things being done for tractors and combines to allow semi-automatic or automatic operations. Fields being by definition open spaces, GPS will will easily work down to a few centimeres.

So your mistake was quite a reasonable one!!!

Re:OT:GPS and agricultural machinery

[cybergibbons]

Conventional GPS can't be accurate to a few centimetres. Even using WAAS it's still metres.

Re:OT:GPS and agricultural machinery

[Slashamatic]

In the first Gulf War I was working at a place that made avionics. We produced a GPS combo unit. Our test unit went down to less than 10 cm CPE when SA was disabled. This was a standard unit for sale for commercial aviation - definitely not survey grade although the antenna/front-end was on the building roof.

I realise that the faster equipment moves, the less accurate the position calculation is but agricultural equipment tends to move very slowly.

Survey grade uses multiple passes to get down to a cm or better but the multiple pass thing means that the only thing allowed to move is the earth.

And your education is completed....

[botzi]

Plow Operators Object to GPS Tracking System

When you read this title and your first thought is about Norvig's General Problem Solver, you know that you've had enough of the CS courses and you should definitely move on...

nothing to do with unions, dummy

[Anonymous Coward]

These are private contractors, usually dipshit white dudes with big 4-wheel drive pickups that have plow blades on the front in the winter. They get contracts from their stupid bubba friends in the towns and at the state, and then turn around and plow private lots for $$ while also billing the goverment for the same hours.

RTFA?

[blankmange]

According to the article, the drivers' were concerned about the accounting accuracy.

But contractors had balked, saying the phones were not proven reliable as an accounting system used for payment.

Nothing is mentioned about an invasion of privacy or an Orwellian allusion. Only us paranoid geeks brought this out....

Re:RTFA?

[Eric Savage]

That's what they say, but this is the standard response to any technology that affects the way laborers work. This is like the Questec system that baseball umpires don't like. I have a feeling that this system is far more accurate than the "I reckon I plowed about 200 miles last night" method that is currently used.

Re:RTFA?

[gmhowell]

Nothing is mentioned about an invasion of privacy or an Orwellian allusion. Only us paranoid geeks brought this out....

Nope, not 'us', but michael. Slashdot's number one asshat editor. He hasn't yet seen a city council vote that wasn't orchestrated by the trilateral commission.

Re:RTFA?

[jc42]

But contractors had balked, saying the phones were not proven reliable as an accounting system used for payment.

I'd believe this. I've worked with a few GPS gadgets, and all of them have the property that they lose their satellites so often that their record of your path is only useful on a statistical (or summary) basis.

When they lose their satellites, there are really only two things they can do. The simplest is to just report your last-known position until they get the satellites back. This can easily produce a record saying that you stopped for N minutes. Of course, when they get satellites again, they'll report a sudden jump in your position. But not always. Remember that under some conditions, the position can be off by 100 meters or so. If you're moving slowly (as a snowplow is likely to do), this could easily give a position very close to that place that you "stopped for N minutes).

The other thing some GPS gadgets do is to extrapolate your path through gaps in coverage. I've seen some pretty funny paths, showing a car suddenly leaving a bridge, driving around on a lake or river, and then suddenly jumping to a nearby road. I've also seen a path take a different fork than was actually taken, and continue on that road until they've diverged too far for the software to believe, at which point the path zips down some connecting street at high speed to get to the correct street. This only happens with GPS gadgets that have street maps, of course.

I'd bet that the admins in this case are attributing much greater accuracy to GPS than it delivers. Especially in urban settings. The reality is that GPS gadgets are often a source of humor for the goofy things they report. But it's not so funny if your paycheck depends on it.

One of the fun toys around our household is the new Garmin iQue, the Palm Pilot with builtin GPS. We took it cross-country on a trip recently, and we saw all of the above misbehaviors. A couple of times we had to pull over until we stopped laughing. It's a great toy. I'd recommend it to anyone who wants such a toy. But I'd probably not want my paycheck to depend on its report of my path.

Totalitarism?

[dimss]

Every day America becomes closer to totalitarism. Even closer than we (russians) were in 1900's. You haven't learned our lessons.

It's not what you think

[Anonymous Coward]

They're having them get GPS-equipped cellular phones and they want them to keep these phones 'on' while they are 'working for the state plowing roads'.

Before the availability of the GPS-equipped phones the State had to accept their logs of how much time they spent plowing roads with no other assurance than their word.

not uncommon

[btharris]

i have heard other companies upgrading their trucks towards this type of management. i have discussed this topic with the driver of the commercial garbage/dumpster pick-up service at the store I work for. a couple months ago, they upgraded all of their trucks with a GPS tracking system and so-called "tattle-tale" ("tattler") boxes, which start beeping if you stay too long in one place. he also has to scan barcodes at every stop so the computer records when and where service is made.

my first reaction was sympathy towards the driver's Orwellian fear. he said the drivers were filing many grievances with their union, but no major decision has been made as of yet.

later I realized that these are THE COMPANY'S equipment, so it seems they should have the right to know where their eqipment is and how it's being used. if the employees have a problem with doing their job, then they should look for other employment. this is, after all, what they get paid for.

there are, however, things that many people overlook---on both sides of the issue. the company may benefit from a precise tracking system so they can ensure their customers are receiving satisfactory service. customer satisfaction can obviously work in favor of the company in the form of more revenue. more revenue can mean more jobs or higher wages.

the driver i've spoken with also said that the "tattle tale" boxes are only triggered if you use the parking/emergency brake instead of just the foot pedal brake. he said he used to take quick 20-minute power naps before the tracking systems were installed, since his shift is so long. taking power naps, he said, is considered much safer than driving long hours without sleep. but now, if he engages the parking brake, the buzzer goes off and he risks punishment. he said some of his co-workers try to take these power naps with only their foot on the pedal brake to keep the buzzer from going off. obviously this isn't safe, especially when you consider that these trucks could easily be hauling over 10 tons of garbage.

my point is that the companies that install this type of equipment may not be considering all the counter-measures that their employees may take to avoid punishment, and some of these counter-measures may be unsafe. perhaps the motivation for attempting this tampering comes from ungrounded Orwellian fears or previous company-union disagreements.

Re:not uncommon

[arkanes]

You know, it sounds to me like the grievance they need to be filing is that they're being asked to drive too long in a shift without time for a nap (although, unless this is long haul stuff we're talking about, I don't see why they'd need to sleep...), rather than about the tracking.

Re:not uncommon

[Anonymous Coward]

the driver i've spoken with also said that the "tattle tale" boxes are only triggered if you use the parking/emergency brake instead of just the foot pedal brake. ... some of his co-workers try to take these power naps with only their foot on the pedal brake to keep the buzzer from going off. obviously this isn't safe,

You know, if the drivers aren't smart enough to rig something with a broomstick, maybe they shouldn't be driving a truck :)

What rig did they use?

[TheVidiot]

Hey, if anyone knows the kind of gps-enabled cell phone they use, please let me know! I'm looking for something similar.

Thanks!

What if it was your life or job?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are inefficiencies in every System in regard to people, always was and will be. To apply a surveillance system, which is similarly designed for convicted criminals, to people and workers is demoralizing and demeaning, maybe unless everyone has to participate from CEO down.

We already pay hugely for contract supervision; is that expense be automated, minimized and removed?

Additionally, it is sad that people will work for relatively meaningless benefit, under such control, trading their professional latitude for temporary and false security of said contracted work. The price of the contractor's professional latitude is now known in actual dollars and will be used against them in future bidding; the victim (or taxpaying winner) of human competition. Show savings of a dollar from the contractor while massive losses occur elsewhere.

The Only way to Win...

[awfar]

Is not to play.

Supposedly you have to have GPS ...

[adzoox]

to have a safe "air car" system if we are to ever have such traffic in the sky. Maybe this is a step closer to that.

What about those Nextel cell phones ?

[Anonymous Coward]

A few days ago interviews on Boston television
stations had the independent contractors saying
that using a cellphone to provide GPS data while
plowing snow would be hazardous to traffic safety.

They cited a Massachusetts state police study that
showed how dangerous cellphones were while driving.

I was under the impression the Nextel phones used
for this project would be rigged to respond to a
coordinates request without operator involvement.
I know at least one Nextel phone is programmable
in Java by ordinary mortals.

Of course using a cellphone for this is a way for
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to get off cheap,
since for some time GPS transponders have been on
the market for long-distance trucks.

It's not about privacy, it's about double dipping

[Anonymous Coward]

It's about the private contractors who plow the road, and while there at it, a few parking lots and shopping malls. While being paid by the state, they're also making money on the side. When you live here, you see this kind of stuff all the time. State contractors doing side jobs on company time. Yeah, it's going to reduce their pay, because they'll have to make an honest living. The state has a responsibility to its taxpayers to prevent fraud.

Sick of them on the highway

[Eric Gibson]

I don't know about yall... but I'm from BumFuk Georgia , USA... and I'm sick of plows/tractors on the roads, hiways, and sh1t going 25 in a 75. Anything to keep them where they are supposed to be is fine with me... Orwellian or not...

A tractor and/or plow is meant as a utility vehicle, period, only. Anything to keep track of thier movements can only be good. Because the guys that drive them are freakin rednecks, and I'm related to most of them so I know what they are capable of... ;-) At 7 in the morning, they are hungover, and they think driving at 25 on a hiway is funny. You think I'm joking... but when I was 17, before I started writing code, I worked with these guys on the weekends grading asphalt, so I know... heh.

Re:Sick of them on the highway

[Anonymous Coward]

First of all, there are no 75mph speed limits in Georgia. The highest is 70 on rural interstate highways.

Second, if there is a snow plow on the highway going 25mph, there's a reasonably good chance that the highway is COVERED IN FUCKING SNOW, in which case you should definitely not be trying to go faster than it is.

Re:Sick of them on the highway

[Eric Gibson]

First of all, since when does a speed limit matter, especially in georgia/atlanta, if it's a 65 it's a 75... by most peoples accounts, around here, that usually means a 95 in a 55...

Second of all, I'm not talking about snow plows... The vast majority of Georgia, except in the north in the mountains, it doesn't get snow more than once a year... if it does, it's never more than an inch! I've never even seen a snow plow on the hiway, even when it does snow! (there may be some in north georgia, but I don't know.) I've never seen a salt truck or anything.

I'm just telling you my experiences with people that operate these vehicles.

Not the issue

[djupedal]

The issue isn't tracking the drivers. The issue is that this is one big step towards robotic plows that don't need drivers.

The drivers know this, and fear being replaced by machines, not being tracked.

There is no such thing as a stealth snow-plow.

Re:Not the issue

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't know those orange hats the snowplow guys wear are lined with tinfoil!

Seriously, machines can barely handle driving on closed courses in good weather with perfect visibility and traction. Forget about them being able to adapt to the way other people drive in the snow, parked cars buried in a drift, lack of visible stripes or pavement edge to follow, and all the other hazards plow drivers have to deal with. I think plows will have humans driving them far longer than trains, long-haul trucks or private autos.

Won't someone think of the future?

[AndroidCat]

If the city knows where the plows are in real-time, car systems could poll the road-net and let you know where the cleared stretches are and when you about to have a close encounter with a plow or salt truck.

Warning, there is a snowplow two feet behind you. Have a Nice Day!

Mind you, in the future, we'll all have flying cars and we won't need plows. Right?

Ob. USA PATRIOT Act point.

[FashionNugget]

hahhhah *cough* PATRIOT ACT *cough* ahahaha

It's not the "patriot act" but the "USA PATRIOT Act". What's the difference? Oh just about everything the word patriot might stand for. It just doesn't sound quite as good when you spell it out, does it: "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism"?

Full text of the Act here Nugget

To the "If you don't like it, quit" people

[Eric Savage]

You are looking at this like it's a technology job where skill matters. A good programmer is 10 times more valuable than a bad one, a good laborer is probably 25-50% better than a bad one. No matter how good you are a plowing the street, you don't have alot of leverage in convincing them that you are worth more money than the guy waiting to take your job. That's why they have unions, for better or worse.

Re:To the "If you don't like it, quit" people

[ABEND]

So, are ten bad programmers as good as one good programmer?

Um, aren't plows the property of the state anyway?

[Millennium]

If the plows are owned by the state -not by the plow drivers- then I have no problem with the state putting GPS receivers in them. It's their property, after all; they could paint them bright pink and install loudspeakers on them that blare Yankee Doodle at max volume on repeat while the plows are running for all I care.

If, on the other hand, the plows are private vehicles, then we have a serious privacy issue here.

Wow, Canada's a real country?!?!

[ScottGant]

I though it was just a made up, joke country from the Simpsons or something. I never knew it was real!

Wow, learn something every day!

Re:Wow, Canada's a real country?!?!

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL, from the sounds of it, you should be learning SEVERAL new things a day, for quite some time. Eating, drinking, deficating, etc...

Re:Wow, Canada's a real country?!?!

[Anonymous Coward]

YHBT. YHL. HAND.

-little billy

Re:Wow, Canada's a real country?!?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Most USians assume that all Canadians have a sense of humor thanks to all of your fine comedians...keep it up and you'll ruin it for everybody.

NO way 40$ an hour

[CrazyJim0]

And to think I paid $100,000 and 8 years to get a scientific computing degree, and be unemployed.

I'll scab those bitches, and plow for 40$ an hour.

Re:NO way 40$ an hour

[Anonymous Coward]

They supply the snowplow. Scab all you like, we'll see if you enoy $40 an hour when you own the plow..etc

Re:NO way 40$ an hour

[tgd]

They pay for the trucks, wear and tear, gas, etc...

You do realize truck drivers can make nearly that, too, right? Most of them don't have to own the truck, either.

GPS is excessive

[ediron2]

Let me put things into perspective, since everyone seems to think this is an acceptable use of technology.

1 - Anyone who has wrangled with telecommute issues knows that bosses have a massive problem wrapping their brain around 'how can I tell if they're working if I can't count butts-in-chairs'? Yet previous threads show most slashdotters feel there are better ways to manage employees.

Likewise, even snowplowing has lots of performance metrics: verifiable complaints sounds like a start. Or spot checks (by whoever)

2 - If we start tracking miles, someone will get efficiency-expert on us and start comparing plow operators. The one with the most miles wins. Which means an operator that uses finesse to plow full-width and not leave berms of concrete-hard snow at driveways and around cars will rank below someone running full-speed and sloppy. For us, this is like paying a coder by lines of code (where verbose and poorly-refactored code wins!) or paying a researcher by the page-of-lab-results. It rewards a new flavor of cheating.

3 - The usual way of subcontracting to private firms doesn't help. We're too soft on incompetent/fraudulent contract awardees, and lowest-bid is too compelling. I've seen bids on projects that couldn't afford to cover maintenance/gas costs on the involved equipment if done right, let alone pay for staff. Yet they're the lowest bidder. Go back to my verifiable complaints suggestion, and add in some teeth to the contract. Ban a contractor for life for the first whiff of fraud. Backcharge them for any work you have to redo. Make it easy to void contracts if the job isn't done to standards. The rest of us have to operate to ISO standards, so can they.

Next, let's go to work on the 'I wear a pager' mindset. I don't wear a pager. I moved from job to job until I found a firm that doesn't obsess at this level. Now, I don't wear a pager, I have very flexible hours, I live in a low-cost region (so I am saving money like crazy), and I really enjoy the job. My job has very rigorous quality standards, though. That's what matters. How or when I do the work is not an issue. In fact, my current boss, when he calls, starts every conversation with 'Good time/ Bad time?', meaning I can break the call off without explanation. I realize that a paycheck is more important than the perks I've mentioned, and a pager is a minor compromise. But the boss doesn't own me. Not even for 8 hours a day. And just like the ill-informed butts-in-seats metric, I take notes on any abuse of my minimum standards for how I like to be treated. Then I update my resume. Then I move on.

Funny thing is, I'm making twice what I did when the boss was a control-freak.

So...

Make the drivers be in communication (cellphone, radio, or data-link like UPS/Fedex tracking systems use), use it to give them a prioritized list of targets. Make them report back 'done' status. Enforce a code of honor/ethics. Have stiff penalties for lying. If a GPS goes into the truck, make it be there for crisis/safety needs, or only to be used as confirming evidence in a hearing/trial. Otherwise, let them be. Reward excellence, whether it be speed or precision or both. Use penalties to guide others to the realization that 'maybe you're just not suited to this job'. Life's too short to be obsessing about the wrong details.

Oh... and I'm sure there's a 'tinfoil hat' or faraday cage that'd thwart GPS reception, and that word will get around once detected. That tactic used to work when I didn't want to receive pager signals...

call me evil but I think it's a good idea

[lunatick]

I am in the middle of a bilzzard right now. I had to drive 22 miles home from work last night: time to drive 1 hour 45 min.

Number of plows or spreaders seen on the way home: 20

Number that were doing something other than sitting on a sidestreed parked with a 2nd plow: 2

Number of streets I was on that showed evidence of plowing 8 hours into storm: 1 (out of 7 streets I used to travel)

Don't know what they were waiting for but with 6 inches on the ground and up to 30 more on the way they should have been out in force.

I'm sorry

[yoshi_mon]

You must not be from around here...

there are, however, things that many people overlook---on both sides of the issue. the company may benefit from a precise tracking system so they can ensure their customers are receiving satisfactory service. customer satisfaction can obviously work in favor of the company in the form of more revenue. more revenue can mean more jobs or higher wages.

Normally when revinues are up the 1st thing that happens is raises for the execs, more perks for said execs, some more of the same equipment so that they can ensure that the draconion policies can be enforced, and then maybe, just maybe if there is any money left over, a few new jobs and a token raise.

They suck, that's what.

[phillymjs]

My company got them for those of us who work in the field, and most of us dislike them. The Java app/tracking service we use is called Telenav

Once that app is running (the i88s phones we have don't have the ability to auto-launch a Java app so it must be manually launched in the morning), it transmits the phone's GPS location every few minutes. My company's traffic manager can pull up a map in her web browser and see where all of us are at any given time.

Here's why we don't like the GPS crap: it completely rapes the battery. The original batteries in the i88s phones were getting sucked dry after being on for about 6 hours. We got new high capacity batteries for them which last the whole day, but by 5pm they are just about drained-- if you forget to plug the phone in to charge that night when you get home, you're screwed the next day. Our old i1000 phones could go 3 days before needing a charge.

Also, the GPS is a little laggy, so the navigation function doesn't work well. If you're driving at highway speeds, it doesn't tell you where to turn until you have already passed that intersection. D'oh!

~Philly

Protecting the public investment...

[Anonymous Coward]

These people are plowing under a contract with a government agency. Should the govt be tracking people on their own time or at their whim? No.

However, anyone who criticizes the public agencies trying to clear snow and then gives them c#@p about spending too much money needs to see the light. Non-Federal agencies are not getting the Federal dollars (nor local revenue) they did in previous years and have had more responsibilities placed upon them. They're trying to make efficient use of limited public funds - their job is to protect the public investment. Without GPS, it can take hours to redeploy a snow plow fleet to address changing conditions. Anyone can see the dollar signs adding up from that old style of management as each hour passes.

In addition, those who criticize government for not being able to account for funds need to step back and look at the big picture of managing infrastructure before they criticize.

Start rant. I've never been big on unions. They were appropriate and greatly needed up through the 1970s. Now, however, they drive more jobs out of the U.S. than they retain and suck union dues only to leave their paying members high and dry when trouble comes. The term "globalization" does not seem to be in their vocabulary. End rant.

Explain? OK...

[MadAnthony02]

More efficient: it ensures drivers are actually plowing, and not sleeping or drinking coffee or at a bar. Also can be used to locate plows and dispach the closest ones to trouble spots.

Save lives: see above, more/clearer roads faster = safer roads. If a snowplow driver is near an accident, tracking can alert dispatch to this. If a snowplow has an accident, dispatch can locate them easily (think OnStar)

Re:Explain? OK...

[Anonymous Coward]

it ensures drivers are actually plowing, and not sleeping or drinking coffee or at a bar.

If they're like the snow plow operators around here in Baltimore, working 36 hours at a time, I hope that they do stop and drink some coffee every now and then.

Call me crazy...

[Tokerat]

...but I don't see putting a tracking device in a plow truck as a bad thing. This would allow better coordination of the trucks. Last night, I drove 30 miles in 3 inch deep snow. I watched the other direction on the highway get plowed and plowed over several times, but my side? It seemed like no one had even bothered to touch it.

Now you'd think after 30 miles at least one township would stop and say "Sh*t, we never did plow the southbound lane on Route 8!"

I could see if they where trying to track people around their homes, etc. But this is emergency vehicle coordination. I think the plow guys are just mad they can't get paid to stop at Wendy's and eat now.

Mass Politics

[^chuck^]

It seems no one has mentioned yet good old Massachusetts politics, in other words, "everybody takes a piece of the pie".

Out here its not uncommon to call up one of the guys, who's getting paid by the state, to come by and plow a section of the road for you, and shoving all that snow into the car ahead.

This is called favors, and it loves to run rampant in this great state. Since most of the plow operators are independent self-employeed bunch, that own there own trucks, they probably don't take too kindly to the state wanting to keep tabs on them. But, at the same point, the my town (worcester) went into debt solely because of the snow storms last year.

Ah well. So thats why I think they don't want the GPS thingies. Don't wanna get caught doing two jobs at the same time.

CTA in Chicago

[Anonymous Coward]

I dont know if this is using GPS or not, but I recently took a few bus trips on less traveled routes that now have some sort of beacon because an automated voice would announce the next stop and ring a bell just before the next stop. This has to be some sort of GPS because putting markers all down the street has got to be expensive. In any event, these were some of the best, quickest and on time busses I have taken in 20 years of traveling the CTA in Chicago, amazing what happens to these notriously slow and lazy drivers when they are being tracked. I say if your working for the public and typically have no supervision on the job, you should expect to be tracked. Actually , if you have no supervision and work on the road you should be tracked, forget if its for the public or not, drive around any large city park here in chicago during the day and you can see public utility drivers hanging out, gas comp, electric comp, police, bus personnel etc chillling out.

Oh cry me a river, snow plow operators...

[NitroWolf]

Somebody call the waaaaambulance for the poor, well paid snow plow operators.

If they are on the job, their employer, in this case the state, has every right to know where they are and what they are doing. They are getting paid to do a job, and they have the gaul to say it's not the states right to know if they are doing the job they are being paid for?

What a load of crap. The only ones complaining about this are the ones that slack off and get paid for work they haven't done. I'm all for slacking, god knows I do it enough at my job, but I *know* that I'm suppose to be doing XXX job, if my boss chooses to audit whether I'm doing it or not, then that's his right.

I'm salaried, so as long as my work gets done, no one cares when I actually do the work, so long as it gets done by the deadline. But if I was getting paid by the hour, you can bet your ass my boss would make sure they are getting their hourly wages worth.

If I were the state, I'd be doing the exact same thing, and the ones bitching and complaining would be marked as the slackers bilking the state for work they never performed.

Piss of whiney bitches. It's my tax dollars paying your salary, so suck it up and drive (plow)on... if you don't like it, someone else will do it.

Re:Oh cry me a river, snow plow operators...

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFA. You don't have a single clue.

They are getting paid to do a job, and they have the gaul to say it's not the states right to know if they are doing the job they are being paid for?

Who said that?

The problem is that this is a new, untested system that they are untrained to use. Their paycheck depends on it. They don't want to do work that they might not get paid for.

Re:Oh cry me a river, snow plow operators...

[NitroWolf]

I see... so because they don't want to learn a new skill that will help the state make sure they are getting their moneies worth... they should throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I did RTFA, and I stand by my comments. The idiots bitching about the new system (which is actually pretty simple) are the ones bilking the state for money, plain and simple.

Re:Um, aren't plows the property of the state anyw

[Anonymous Coward]

You really need to RTFA. To sum up, The issue is with private plows that are subcontracted by the state when big storms come. The article doesn't mention privacy issues. The main issue appeared to be that they are not trained to use the system (if they mess up they don't get paid for the work they did) and that the GPS system will replace the paper system that is currently used to bill the state. The GPS is unproven and they apparently don't trust it.

GPS makes good sense

[Spazmania]

Using a GPS system to track the snow plows just makes good sense.

Everybody who lives in an area that gets snow knows just how capricious the plowing schedule is. In the big snow last year, my street was plowed after the first two inches fell, and it didn't see another plow for four days.

With GPS, the coordinating agency can figure out where the plows missed without falling victim to the squeaky wheel syndrome.

As for the Orwellian concerns, I'm inclined to poo-poo them in this instance. This is not about Big Brother snooping on my private life or anyone else's private life; its about making sure that a company spending my hard-earned tax dollars is accomplishing what I've paid for it to do.

With that in mind, the GPS unit should, IMHO, have an off switch. The operator can turn it off any time he wants; he just shouldn't get credit for plowing unless its on.

Re:GPS makes good sense

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. and I think that the system is only on during billing hours.

From what I got from the article, I think the real concern is that the system is untested and the drivers are not properly instructed in how to use it. The state intends to have this immediately replace the old paper time sheets.

I think in general the GPS is a good idea. But drivers pay will depend on this system. Many of these driver may be intimidated by computers. They have to use this system and if something goes wrong they are afraid they won't get paid.

I think they need proper testing before they send this system into full use. Have the GPS phones deployed in the first year but don't use it as the primary accounting record but as a verification to make sure it works. Then phase it in with test groups.

Unfortunately, we are in the minority here because most of the commenters obviously didn't read the articles.

But... But... We might have to do our jobs now!

[nick_davison]

The employer (which happens to be the state) wants to know if the employee is really doing the work (or as much of the work as) the employee claims.

I'd always heard the stories of street sweepers (I live in San Diego, live we ever see a snow plough) hanging out for most of their shift, then driving quickly to notch up the mileage at the end, but I'd figured it was overblown hype.

Then, on thanksgiving, I stopped by a local deserted target lot where a friend was working security. We were standing in the lot, talking, when a street sweeper litteraly flew by.

If you watch Formula 1 racing, you'll see the drivers, on the warm up lap, swerving from side to side as much as possible to get as much mileage (and therefore as much warming) as possible in to the tyres. Well, this guy seemed to be doing the same. About 30 miles an hour, swerving from one side to the other of the lot, rocketing down one row and then up the next.

There was nothing, whatsoever, to indicate street cleaning was actually happening: He was churning up, not cleaning away, the biggest cloud of dust I've ever seen from one of those things. The was just no way the vehicle could actually clean at those speeds.

What he was obviously doing was notching up the correct number of miles, somewhere largely deserted, before logging his vehicle back in.

Charmed as I am to pay taxes for that "service", I'd personally much rather he was tracked by GPS and actually had to do the job he's paid for. Privacy has got nothing to do with it - set the system to turn off during scheduled breaks, attach it to the vehicle not him, whatever you like. It's all about stopping people from taking advantage of jobs they know are hard to supervise and monitor.

They actually have to do the job they're paid for? My heart bleeds.

OR The obvious reason.

[Zebra_X]

Cutting costs. The state probably wants to guard against lazy contractors, as they should. Why would the contractors object to being tracked if they weren't doing their job? Also, knowing the location of the plow would allow them to direct plows more effectively.

This sort of tracking is already done by mobile advertsing vehicles. They have a GPS installed to ensure that they are travelling their designated routes.

Re:Warning: michael is a typical slashdot editor..

[Guppy06]

"Presumably plowing could be more efficient"

"Why? ...Why? Because of GPS? Explain!"

When everything is covered in snow, it can be difficult to know where the road ends and somebody's front yard begins. GPS would be helpful to the drivers in letting them know they're still plowing the road and not some poor shmuck's VW bug.

boss watching me!

[iamhassi]

My boss watching me and knowing what I'm doing while I'm on the job?!? Sounds like a serious privacy issue to me, god forbid my boss make sure I'm doing my job!

Boss: what the hell? why are all the plows parked at the strip club?
Driver: we're getting snowjobs

Re:boss watching me!

[ljavelin]

You said it! The company that I work for hires drivers from a contracting firm.

The fact is that we don't know if we're being ripped off or not. The itemization of monthly services is weak at best.

I've recommended that we put GPS tracking into the contract, but what do you know, the company that we contract with is refusing, saying that it would add "undo burden and lower reliability"!

Funny, since my company would PAY for the equipment, and if errors are reported we'll work with the contracting firm to settle the differences.

That's OK that they don't want to play - we'll find someone who'll be willing to play our game and drop these guys like a rock. Thats what contracts are all about.

FYI... this has to do with money, not lives...

[ethanms]

Studies by private investigators in this area (Mass/RI) have shown that many of the plow operators actually complete less then 1/2 their expected route.

The previous method to determine whether things were getting done or not (checking odometers) isn't working, because the plow guys who basically do laps up and down the main street of a town with their blades up to run up the milage.

In theory, this will let the towns/cities know whether or not the guys getting paid by the hour and mile for plowing snow, are actually sitting at the donut shop.

In this case, the only other way to make this work is to pay people to go around and track the workers, which puts their lives at risk (driving in snow).

In addition, seems like hiring babysitters for the plow guys is just as bad as GPS... at least this way a GPS doesn't lie or hold a grudge if you piss off a human supervisor.

If they're doing their jobs this isn't an issue...

They want to plow their friends on city money, and eat donuts and watch TV... THAT'S the problem

I totally agree

[Pan T. Hose]

he said some of his co-workers try to take these power naps with only their foot on the pedal brake to keep the buzzer from going off. obviously this isn't safe, especially when you consider that these trucks could easily be hauling over 10 tons of garbage.

How could they not think that using this inhumane technology to make sure their employers are working would make sleeping at work so dangerously inconvenient!

Snow Job

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahh yes, the usual batch of American herd thinking on Slashdot. Way too much nonsense about how employers have certain rights. I hate to break it to the Slashdot office sheep, but your employer does not have the right to monitor your every move. They don't even have the right to control what you say at work. Your basic rights don't take a break when you enter the office door and then go back into effect when you leave. If your employer is bound by basic laws during the workday, then they are certainly bound by the Constitution and every other law and treaty concerning your human rights.

This Massachusetts GPS policy is short-sighted and causes more problems than it solves. The main purpose of technology like this is to monitor what employees are doing every minute of the day. Employers may think that the tech excuses this constant monitoring, but they will end up messing up their own company or agency. Why? For one thing, this will increase employee dissatisfaction, simply because any normal person hates having somebody peering over their back all day. GPS and computer dispatch systems also impair efficiency, because in just about every work situation employees find unauthorized ways to work around the official policies and procedures. If they have to perform their work knowing that they are constantly being tracked, they will stick with the more inefficient procedures. The wisdom of respecting these informal work arrangements is illustrated by the old union tactic of the "work to rule" strike, which shuts down a company when workers follow every little code and regulation and procedure.

Just because you have new tech doesn't mean that you should use it and it doesn't necessarily make the workers more efficient. Last year I was taking a cab out to NASA in Greenbelt, MD, and had a cab driver who told me that he was the most veteran in the company. Over the course of the ride he gave me an overview of how the new technologies like the computer dispatch system had actually made his job harder. He even showed me the ways the cab drivers sabotaged the system to get away from the constant GPS tracking.

Nextel network issue

[trboyden]

The biggest and reasonable complaint I've heard is that the system they are using is by Nextel who has poor coverage in Massachusetts. This combined with the fact that the contractors don't get paid if they can't be tracked (ie: if they go through a dead zone, which there are many) makes for a valid reason for complaint.

Programmers can be so egotistical

[Anonymous Coward]

"You are looking at this like it's a technology job where skill matters."

Anybody who has every tried to drive heavy-duty trucks in snow will know that skill *does* matter. Software is not the only place where skill makes a difference.

AAAUAUUUUUGGGGHHHH!!!! DEAR GOD, NO!!!!!!

[KnightStalker]

Sorry for the interruption, couldn't control myself there. Please carry on.

Here is the contract

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.state.ma.us/mhd/hwyops/winter.htm

Scroll down to:

SNOW & ICE CONTROL OPERATIONS AGREEMENT

Its not how you collect it.. its how you use it

[halo8]

I read all the posts (+4 and +5) and thus far no one has mentioned this point.

everyone seems to agree that the company has the right to collect whatever info they want.

the question should be... how they USE that info?
if they micro manage every minute of every person thats going to piss everybody off and be Orwellian, if they let the good employees do there thing and realize that there are exceptions that can be made it, and micro manage the constant abusers that the way it SHOULD work.

its like in tech support... on the phone logged in.. company A (compaq) managed every button i pressed.. how many times did i hit "mute" today, was it in the green yellow or red catagory (a # that was always "dynamic") well i hated that job even though i did a good at it.. company B (IBM)only ever had three stats or metrics.. and it was eather pass or fail, as long as two of them at any given time were a pass.. you were doing a good job and managers and supervisors let you do it.

Re:Its not how you collect it.. its how you use it

[careysb]

Isn't that the basic issue with privacy, that there has been a long history of abuse and who would you really trust with your private information.

Honest contract vs. Kickbacks

[Anonymous Coward]

I had to deal with snowplow business for a few years, and frankly they are one of the most dishonest businesses I had to give money too. ("We where there at 2AM, it just snowed more after that" and all kind of crap!) They are a small mafia!

Then you don't have a choice! The expense to remove snow yourself is pretty big, and you are ready to pay extra to make sure your business is cleared of snow beffore the morning drive!

So the contractor is plowing the main boulevard, big contract for the city, but often takes "detours" and stops at 20 stores on the way because they pay a kickback to be cleaned fast!

Because of this the cleanup is not done until 8:00 and 25% of the paying city-zens leaving between 6 and 7:30 cannot go faster than 6 miles an hour.

Now the city, paying the big bucks could make sure there is no foul play by adding simple GPS tracking devices, like every truck delivery today! But that would mean penalty, lower bids or fewer kickbacks!

"Hey boys! If you want to keep your drivers job you will agree with our lawyer's decision to protest for you the GPS tracking devices on our rigs".

REAL Dispute: Pay is tied to untested Tech

[Derivin]

The origional post has bee updated in a vague way notting that this is a dispute about money and not about being monitored without explaining.

And no-one has posted the explination, and it seems that no one in the newengland area who watches the news posts to /. (and neither do plow operators is seems).

At issue is the pay drivers recieve will be tied to the GPS system. The gps system being used was shown to have issues tracking durring really heavy storms and when more than one device is really close together (one may drop off from the monitors standpoint).

Plows work the hardest in heavy storms, and also do alot of tandum work. One plow within 2 car lengths of the other.

The dispute is about their pay. Their pay would automatically be assigned from the GPS monotoring system. There is no proceedure for plow operators to dispute the GPS data. If the GPS system goes down, the older means of recieving pay would NOT go into effect, the plow operators would go UNPAID.

That was the dispute.

As for the public safty issues, there were plenty of other private plow operators who were happy to sign a temporary contract to plow for this weekends storm (With the GPS). The public safty issue was used by current contractors to pull for public support and to pressure the administration.

Bullshit summary

[yuri benjamin]

From the summary:
but the dispute highlights the public safety versus employee privacy issue.

Having read the FA, I don't see privacy as the issue. It's about whether or not the GPS system is as reliable as the paper based admin for determining billing.
I don't know where privacy comes into it - they're tracking the trucks, not the contractors. Yes privacy is an issue in employment in general, but this article is not about that. I suppose you could twist any article to fit your hobby horse though.

Privacy?

[Awptimus Prime]

Okay, it would be different if the plow drivers were driving their private snowplows, but while driving a $100k plow that belongs to a company, then there's no issue.

Many trucking companies have been using GPS to keep up with their vehicles for over 10 years. This helps catch when drivers go too fast, too slow, down the wrong roads, have an accident, get stuck on the side of the road, etc.

I just don't see a privacy issue here. Especially not when on the clock for tax payers.

Re:Privacy?

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no privacy issue. Read the article. The post was way off the subject. The articles talks about the system being untested and hard to use and the drivers pay is entirely dependent on the system.

The original poster was trying to get attention from the paranoid /.ers.

Re:Privacy?

[tbuskey]

> Okay, it would be different if the plow drivers >were driving their private snowplows, but while >driving a $100k plow that belongs to a company, >then there's no issue.

My brother in law plows for the state of Massachusetts. He owns his own plow. And the state pays him in August.

Mountain or Molehill?

[Estragon]

I think that the discussion here is blowing things way out of proportion.

Firstly, we aren't talking about the government tracking its own equipment. These are independent contractors who supply their own plows.

Secondly, the contract dispute was about many things -- it's a negotiation. According to this news story,

In exchange for carrying GPS-equipped phones, drivers have won concessions in pay and minimal hours and the retention of the voucher pay system.

It was a negotiating position.

this isn't a technological problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Tattle-tale boxes are making people sleep in their cars without the brakes on and thus creating dangerous situations?

That's drawing an incorrect conclusion.

The thesis that these people need to take 20 minute power naps to be safe has nothing to do with what electronics are installed in the truck.

If they need to take 20 minute power naps to be safe they need to work with their management to make clear that stopping for 20 minutes should not be construed as a mark against them. Then they can takes the naps even with the monitoring equipment in the truck.

Simple Answer: Free Market

[blackbear]

The simple answer to the problem, is to answer the question of who owns the trucks. If the State owns them, then there's no question that the State can track them. If the trucks are privately owned, then tracking them would require either a contract provision, or another onerous law.

The nice thing about a free market is that you can always shop for some company willing to give up their employee's privacy for the right money. And the employees are, of course, free to find an employer who respects their privacy a little more. If the State can't find any takers, then the idea fails. If the contractor can't find any employees, then the idea fails (and the contractor gets sued.)

In principle, it's a very simple problem with a very simple answer; as long as people are free to engage in commerce with who they choose. But after the lawyers get involved it becomes a question of workers rights. People would rather file a law suit than try to find find a more reasonable employer.

oh, SNOW!

[Anonymous Coward]

Had to read this a couple of times before it dawned on me the writer was refering to SNOW plows. Thanks for such a clear, geocentric message, and for remembering that not everyone lives up north.

already done, not new.

[Anonymous Coward]

in Baltimore (Maryland), the MTA uses GPS to track where the buses are. this was implemented about 2 years ago.

Oh my GOD!

[ChaoticLimbs]

You mean that the state who pays for the plowing service would like to know how quickly their roads are being serviced? OMFG what is this world coming to?
These contractors have cushy jobs with near 100% job security. They have to get up early, but let's face it- there are many people who will get up and plow the main roads and then stop for coffee (on the clock) and take their time on the backroads. It wouldn't surprise me if this is a reactionary tactic to deal with complaints of laziness.

What you're REALLY not getting

[FredFnord]

The $300 is almost certainly a 'snow emergency' rate. It's when they want to get every single driver out there. It happens once or twice a year, and generally not for very long... just long enough to get the major roads plowed. Couple of days, maybe?

The rest of the year, the wages are almost certainly between $40 and $60. At least, that's how things worked where I lived, when I was back east.

So, maybe you think that $600 for a 30 minute drive to work, two hours' work, and a 30 minute drive back sounds *wonderful*... but does it sound so nice when it's $100?

-fred

Re:What you're REALLY not getting

[Anonymous Coward]

$33 per hour? Sounds Okay- that's $66,000.00 per year. LOTS of people make do with less.

Re:What you're REALLY not getting

[Anonymous Coward]

...and YES, I know they don't work full-time, year-round. That was just for comparing the rate.

Deliberate

[FredFnord]

You're partway right about this, and perhaps the unions do deserve some amount of blame. However, the lion's share has to go to the companies and union-busting consultants, who spend enormous amounts of time and money trying to make unions look as bad as possible so that nobody will unionize.

The book Confessions of a Union Buster is a worthwhile read. You may or may not take what he says as gospel, but there is good documentation to suggest that what he says is goig on, actually is, constantly and with a great deal of malice aforethought.

Robert Reich also has some things to say about this, in various of his books. Some interesting discussion of it in Locked in the Cabinet.

-fred

Re:Deliberate

[RayBender]

Indeed, you are likely quite right. Unlike the case in Europe, American companies are unashemedly and actively trying to kill unions. That's not a good thing.

Ah, yes, but that's the point, isn't it...?

[FredFnord]

The people running these groups have never in fact tried to drive heavy-duty trucks in snow. They don't *care* about skill levels. The trucks are owned by the operators, driven by the operators, and insured by the operators. People constantly complain about plowing no matter how well it is done, so complaints (except perhaps by people in authority) aren't worth noting.

It doesn't matter if a job requires skill, if the people who are hiring don't KNOW (or care) that it does.

-fred

Re:Um, aren't plows the property of the state anyw

[Anonymous Coward]

these are privately-owned vehicles, their owners conracting with the commonwealth of mass. some of them try to get away with goofing off and this is a huge problem for mass. The other side of the coin is that the checks don't come from mass to the plow owners til about august.

Breaking news from the roads around Boston!

[etcshadow]

It appears that the plow operators, despite having "reached a temporary comprimise" have actually organized some sort of "blue-flue"-esque walk-out/strike without "technically" going on a walk-out/strike. Let me explain:

1) The roads are not getting plowed for shit today. Trust me, I've been driving them.

2) The only plows I <i>have</i> seen today have been in long trains (6 or more plows) driving slowly head-to-tail, plowing only the <i>shoulders</i> of highways and not plowing city streets whatsoever.

3) I also passed several of these "plow-trains" just stopped on the side of the road. I've never seen so many plows out <b>not</b> plowing in my life.

Bastards. Lazy bastards. That's right. F*cking-A this pisses me off. Yeah, you can bet your ass that if they were having their positions tracked then the roads would be plowed today.

Man this has me pissed off. I should stop now.

Practical reasons for GPS

[Trickster Coyote]

Here are some very practical reasons for using GPS on snow plows:

1) snow plows are usually out on the roads before the snowstorm has stopped, and driving conditions are dangerous even for snow plows. If the plow is in an accident, GPS can provide tracking for emergency help.

2) Dispatch can monitor progress of all plows and see which areas are behind and can re-assign plows as needed.

3) GPS tracking data can show how recently each street has been plowed. This can be fed into a road conditions website, so if someone has to go somewhere, they can plan the safest route.

I would think that if you are going to spend money on GPS tracking you should do something useful with it instead of keeping a big brother eye on contractors just to make sure that Mr. Plow is actually out on the streets and not hanging at Moe's with the Plow King.

GPS

[coyotedata]

Global Plowing System

Plow operators don't get paid on time

[tbuskey]

My brother in law plows for the state of MA. He supplies his own truck, plow, fuel, registration, etc. This ain't a cheap investment.

The state pays him for his labour 6 months to a year later. They used to pay in August only, but now I think they also pay mid winter also.

It's not something you do to make money. If there's no snow, like in past years, you don't get paid and might have to sell your truck.

My brother in law sees it as extra $$ to buy that harley or other toy.

Personally, I think the state screws the plow operators, but then I don't have to supply my own computer and software when I go to work as a Sysadmin.

odometers?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can understand not wanting to buy a GPS system. So what if it is less than $1000. That's still a chunk of money for something you don't really want.

What I'd like to know is, if the only concern for the state is whether their money is being properly spent, wouldn't it be cheaper for everyone involved (and less controversial) for them to just audit the odometers? After all, if you plan on slacking off, are you going to do it while driving around in your snowplow?

Why not satellite collars?

[NetBoy]

Most people seem to think it makes sense. It's
company truck, so company can do it, it's state
highway, so state DOT can do it. Perfect sense.
Wouldn't it be easier and more reliable to make
employees wear GPS bracelets? If it's an issue
of getting paid, don't make them punch in codes;
trust the company to get it right. If one is
going to look up who is near something and then
radio them, why not just radio all trucks; it's
usually a common repeater channel.

I was involved in planning such a project. The
plows were going to appear on a website so
residents could see where they were. Somehow
the talk kept coming around to how to deal with
people calling in and demanding the plow come
to them.

And then there were the "stealth" plows.

NOT Troll, Off-Topic!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Come on, mods. Learn the rules.