Truck drivers across the U.S. say they are increasingly pressured to operate equipment they believe is unsafe — from dilapidated trailers, to overloaded tankers and malfunctioning braking systems — and some say speaking up can cost them their jobs.
Two former truck drivers interviewed by FreightWaves, who requested anonymity due to fear of retaliation, described what they say were repeated attempts by their former employers to push productivity over safety.
Their experiences highlight both the risks drivers face on the road and the legal protections available when drivers refuse unsafe work.
“This trailer is not safe to move”
One former over-the-road truck driver said the Texas-based company he worked for repeatedly attempted to pressure him into hauling damaged or improperly repaired trailers, including equipment with brake defects, alignment problems and visible structural damage.
“I told them flat-out, this trailer is not safe to move,” the driver said, describing an incident involving a trailer that had recently rolled over. “They kept trying to push me anyway.”
In another exchange, the driver said he made clear he would not attach to unsafe equipment.
“I told them, ‘This trailer is not safe to move. I am not going to hook up to this thing,’” he said. “They were trying to push me anyway.”
He said dispatchers sometimes urged him to continue driving equipment that should have been taken out of service — even after licensed mechanics warned the carrier that the trailer could not legally return to the road.
Ultimately, the driver refused. “Part of my job is to check that equipment before it goes on the road,” he said. “If I touch the road with unsafe brakes and someone gets hurt, that’s on me.”
He said his decision to refuse unsafe equipment may have prevented a serious accident and that his motivation was never personal retaliation.
“This isn’t about vengeance. It’s about safety,” he said. “There are other companies doing the same thing, and it gives the whole industry a bad name.”
“There are other companies doing this,” he added. “And unless drivers know their rights, it keeps happening.”
Related: Truck drivers win $52M whistleblower retaliation verdict against Sysco
“They counted bathroom breaks against productivity”
A driver based in Illinois, who is pursuing an OSHA whistleblower complaint against his former company, described a workplace culture in which drivers were penalized for stopping — even to use the restroom — because non-driving time was treated as unproductive under the carrier’s internal metrics.
He said drivers were given a basic reference sheet showing which activities counted toward productivity (i.e. loading, unloading, fueling and similar tasks). “Outside of those listed categories, most on-duty time when the truck wasn’t moving would lower your productivity average,” the driver said. “There was never a clear written explanation of how time spent waiting in line, sitting in traffic, in the shop, calling dispatch, or handling normal needs like restroom breaks was actually calculated. Because of that, drivers were often unsure how much of that time counted and how much did not.”
The driver said he raised repeated concerns about basic human needs, weight compliance and safety inspections — all documented in emails and messages — but received no corrective action before being terminated.
He has since filed a retaliation complaint under federal whistleblower statutes.
Alleged pressure to overload tankers
The Illinois-based truck driver said he also faced systemic pressure from his previous employer to overload fuel tankers beyond legal limits to meet productivity and financial targets.
“If truck stop shows they only have space for 7,500 gallons, you should load 7,500,” the driver said. “The expectation was to average roughly the maximum legal load (around 7,800 gallons). If a location only had space for less, I would load what fit, but that shortfall affected the running average. Drivers were then expected to bring the average back up on later loads, which created pressure to push higher numbers over time.”
He said internal metrics penalized drivers who stayed under legal maximums, while rewarding those who loaded heavier — even when doing so risked violating weight limits.
“Internal driver averages were shared, and drivers below target were highlighted while those above target were praised,” the driver said.
He said he raised concerns with human resources but received no corrective response.
“I asked HR, how is it that drivers are being praised for loading over legal limits?” he said.
Brake warnings and productivity pressure
The Illinois-based driver said he also experienced pressure to keep operating trucks with unresolved safety warnings, including brake-system alerts.
“I got an ABS warning — ‘service now’ — after offloading diesel,” he said. “It was telling me to go to the shop.”
Instead, he said he was instructed to keep driving and let a different shift handle repairs.
“I told my lead there was an ABS issue, and he told me, ‘No, the night driver will take it later,’” he said.
The driver said waiting for guidance on safety concerns was itself treated as a performance problem.
“My lead is not a mechanic. He can’t decide what’s safe,” he said. “If there’s a brake issue, the truck has to go to the shop.”
He added, “Waiting for an answer about a safety issue also counted against my productivity.”
What drivers can do when conditions are unsafe
Federal and state laws provide truck drivers with protections when they refuse to operate unsafe equipment or report violations.
Drivers facing unsafe conditions are advised to:
- Document everything, including dispatch messages, repair orders, photos and ELD records
- Report safety concerns in writing, using internal safety channels
- Refuse unsafe work, when operating the vehicle would violate safety laws
- File a whistleblower complaint if retaliation occurs, particularly under the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) or applicable state laws
The post When drivers say no: Truckers speak out about unsafe working conditions appeared first on FreightWaves.
