Posted By ABA President Peter Pantuso, Feb. 27, 2008

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) proposed rulemaking on entry-level driver training calls for a lot of tests, among other things. But it has failed the first test of feasibility - acknowledging that driving a motorcoach is a heckuva lot different than driving a truck!

The proposal would mandate that institutional and motor carrier training programs for entry-level driver trainees must be accredited; establishes qualifications for classroom and skills instructors; mandates specified training content for classroom and behind-the-wheel training on an hours rather than performance-oriented basis; obligates all entry-level driver trainees to pass both knowledge and skills tests; requires training institutions or motor carrier companies to issue a certificate of completion and proficiency; and compels states to check the drivers' CDL status and driver training certificates prior to issuing a CDL.

On the surface, these may not seem particularly unreasonable. But the proposal was clearly designed strictly from the perspective of truck drivers.

The evidence is overwhelming: the proposal has no mention of passengers. And the list goes on.

But the bottom line is this - truck driving schools do not turn out good motorcoach drivers.

This is not a swipe at truck driving schools, which are fine institutions for training future truck drivers. But since a bus is not a truck, and there are no motorcoach driving schools, it is bad public policy to cobble together a regulation specifically affecting motorcoach drivers without any regard whatsoever for the specific needs of that group.

Equally worrisome is the fact that this could have a chilling effect on the attraction of motorcoach driving as a profession. We all know out industry faces enough challenges already. We do not need to worsen what is becoming a shortage of good drivers by making it more difficult for them to pursue a career as a motorcoach driver - especially when there are no identifiable safety benefits of such a rule.

But there are costs. In the agency's regulatory analysis the cost for this rule, the motorcoach industry is expected to pay $8.2 million to comply with the new mandate. That's too high a price to pay for something so lacking in any value as currently written.

What are your thoughts?