Unlike the last big three-letter mandate -- for ELDs -- President Donald Trump's English language proficiency (ELP) mandate garners strong support among owner-operators.
ELP emerged as a hot button issue this year, with states passing laws imposing fines on drivers who can't demonstrate proficiency, and new guidance from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration telling inspectors how to enforce federal rules, now that ELP violations have returned to the out-of-service (OOS) criteria.
When Overdrive polled its mostly owner-operator readership in May, the language proficiency regulation itself seemed to truly bring respondents together, with 94% supporting it. That 94% likely makes ELP enforcement more popular than broker transparency (83%) and Trump himself (76% in pre-election polling).
A commanding 75% of respondents to the question above felt commercial motor vehicle drivers don't just need to check a box for the bare minimum of ELP, but to also hold the ability to "communicate with everyone -- motorists, law enforcement -- and to understand warnings over CB/other radio." The FMCSA's new guidance on the subject of ELP outlines a two-pronged test, but doesn't go as far as saying the driver needs to be able to communicate with everyone.
"Let's face it, they are driving an 80,000-lb. missile on our highways," wrote one commenter, and if they lack ELP, "our national security is at risk."
Some commenters focused squarely on practical issues. "Enough is enough," said one. "No more DOT officer walking away from a truck and driver inspection because of language barriers." Overdrive has heard first-hand from inspectors who won't get under a truck if the driver doesn't speak English. The commenter continued: "No more dispatch, shippers, receivers and dealers who waste so much time" communicating with drivers who don't speak English.
At least 10 commenters tried putting the shoe on the other foot. "I don’t speak French, so I avoid going to Eastern Canada," said one. Many others thought through what they considered an absurdity: trying to travel abroad and operate a commercial truck on foreign roads.
"It would be foolish for me to drive a big rig in a country where I couldn’t read warning signs or communicate with law enforcement! The push to allow non-English proficiency drivers here is simply out of greed by those with political influence who want cheap labor!"
Some recommended harsher enforcement of ELP on the roads.
One commenter laid the blame for accidents on negligent drivers and nonprofessional, regular old four-wheelers. ELP mandate for all drivers, even passenger cars? At least a dozen supported that, among some other ideas:
- Preventing CDL schools offering tests and instruction in other languages
- Targeting carriers who hire drivers who don't speak English
- Impounding trucks from drivers placed OOS for lacking ELP and issuing heavy fines
Carriers who hire drivers knowingly that "don’t speak English should be fined accordingly," wrote one commenter. "There are fines for lesser things, such as not checking your driver’s [Motor Vehicle Record] yearly."
While having regulation in place is one thing, enforcing it is entirely another. Keen commenters urged special attention to what ELP enforcement might really look like.
"I don't care if you are a rainbow unicorn or an Elvis impersonator from the planet Mars, if you are a professional and you can do the job safely, go for it," one commenter wrote. "But that includes the whole job, which includes communicating sufficiently and reading sufficiently, something even 'Bubba Bo trucker' has a problem with at times, which by the way that should also come with equal consequences for everyone."
Ultimately, just a single percentage of survey respondents felt ELP was unnecessary for commercial drivers. Even considering the nuance and edge cases outlined in various comments, it's near complete driver support for the ELP regulation. How it's carried out by FMCSA and its state-level enforcers will make all the difference in how the rule plays out in the months and years ahead.
[Related: FMCSA issues ELP enforcement policy guidance for inspectors]
Some 19% of survey respondents favored a lower ELP bar in some ways -- to simply ensure drivers have enough English "to understand road signs and law enforcement/inspectors." Right around 5% noted drivers don't "really" need full ELP, but "at least enough to understand road signs." One comment came in Spanish, pointing out that lots of road signs use symbols, many used internationally, and things like speed limits are expressed in numerals. The question is implied: how much English do you really need?
"I have been a truck driver for three years," wrote another respondent. "My English is basic. I try to communicate as much as I can. I understand the signs and signals on the road perfectly. ... I consider it good to know English, but not to the point that an officer can decide whether to keep your license or take it away from you, since it costs a lot."
The commenter feared an inspector, perhaps just having a bad day, might take them OOS just "because he doesn't like you," and favored tickets to the OOS route.
After all, inspectors do make mistakes, don't they?
"The entire ELP enforcement effort must be fair, unbiased, consistent and able to determine a minimum level of ELP required," wrote one commenter. "Also needed: A return-to-work process for drivers placed OOS via some sort of standardized training and testing to prove ELP. ELP needs to be tracked via a Clearinghouse" much like drug/alcohol testing "with drivers listed as prohibited or not prohibited," the commenter said.
Question 1: Is ELP enforcement truly necessary?
Question 2: What percentage of drivers don't speak English?
Question 3: Do truckers want ELP to be an OOS violation?
Question 4: Non-domiciled CDLs: Should states allow them to go to non-citizens?
