OOIDA’s stance on English proficiency not new
The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association submitted comments to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration about the importance of truck drivers being able to read and converse in English.
Sure, that sentence could apply to recent letters or petitions filed by OOIDA. But, in this instance, we’re talking about comments sent all the way back in 2008.
It was nearly 20 years ago, but the message is pretty much identical to the one OOIDA continues to preach today. First of all, “English language testing should be mandatory,” the Association said.
“Experience has shown that a commercial motor vehicle driver’s ability to communicate effectively in English is critical from a safety perspective,” OOIDA wrote in the 2008 comments signed by then-President Jim Johnston.
The Association then went on to provide examples of crashes involving drivers who were suspected of lacking basic English skills.
In 2003, Bosnian truck driver Ejub Grcic was involved in a crash that led to the death of five people. Police said that Grcic’s truck was in excess of the Pennsylvania road’s 10-ton weight limit when he ran a stop sign and crashed into a car. Grcic later pleaded guilty to five counts of involuntary manslaughter and one count of unlawful activities for driving a CMV while unable to speak English. Land Line reported that an FBI investigation found that Grcic was unable to speak, read or write in English at the time he obtained his license.
In 2007, Land Line reported that a train plowed through a truck’s trailer as it rested on an active rail line in Kings Mountain, N.C. At the time, police said the truck driver understood very little English and didn’t realize that a sign urged drivers to move forward to avoid blocking the rail line.
“Unless state licensing agencies offer separate English-proficiency tests, the only way to ensure that aspiring commercial truck drivers have a sufficiently firm grasp of the English language is by requiring all CDL and CLP applicants to take both the knowledge and skills tests in English,” OOIDA wrote in 2008. “This requirement must be uniformly applied across the states if the types of accidents described above are to be prevented.”
OOIDA has maintained the message that proper testing and training must start at the CDL level, so that people without the necessary skills – including the ability to speak basic English – don’t end up in the driver’s seat in the first place. The key to the regulation is that individuals must be able to “sufficiently” converse in English. As OOIDA President Todd Spencer put it recently, that doesn’t mean they need to recite an encyclopedia. It’s just a conversation.
Florida truck crash
Fast-forward 17 years since OOIDA’s comments, and questions surrounding the testing standards of CDL holders remain front and center.
On Aug. 12 in St. Lucie County, Fla., a minivan crashed into a tractor-trailer driven by 28-year-old Harjinder Singh. All three of the van’s occupants were killed in the crash.
The initial investigation indicated that Singh executed an illegal U-turn that led to the crash. He was arrested for three counts of vehicular homicide. White Hawk Carriers, which was Singh’s company, had its insurance policy canceled on Aug. 19. The company’s operating authority was revoked on Aug. 20.
The crash prompted questions about whether Singh should have been operating a commercial motor vehicle in the United States. Department of Transportation officials said the agency’s preliminary investigation found that he was incorrectly issued a full-term CDL by Washington in 2023 before being given a non-domiciled CDL by California in 2024.
FMCSA officials reported that Singh failed an assessment of English language proficiency administered after the crash. According to the DOT, he provided correct responses to only two of 12 verbal questions and was able to accurately identify only one of four highway traffic signs. The DOT said Singh was issued a speeding ticket on July 3 in New Mexico but was not given any violations for inability to speak English. New Mexico State Police released body cam footage of the interaction and argued that the officer was able to communicate with Singh.
As of press time, details about the crash and Singh’s level of English skills continued to emerge.
English-proficiency enforcement
In March, OOIDA petitioned the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance to begin issuing out-of-service orders when a truck driver is unable to meet English-proficiency standards. Following an executive order from President Donald Trump on April 28, CVSA voted in May to reinstate the out-of-service order and to shore up CDL testing standards.
On May 20, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy joined OOIDA officials in Austin, Texas, to announce that the DOT would begin enforcing an existing regulation that requires CDL holders to demonstrate basic English proficiency.
According to the DOT order, enforcement of English proficiency was set to begin June 25.
Are violators placed out of service?
Yes and no.
According to FMCSA data, 7,688 English-proficiency violations were issued from the enforcement date through July. Out of those violations, only 1,380 were placed out of service.
Texas issued the most violations with 2,603. However, the Lone Star State placed violators out of service only 1.1% of the time. It is unclear how many of those violations occurred in the commercial zone along the Southern U.S. border. Arizona – another border state – had the second-most English-proficiency violations for that time period. A little more than 20% of Arizona’s 335 violations were placed out of service.
Only two states placed violators out of service for each violation, although the sample size is small for both states. South Dakota placed violators out of service in all 16 instances, while Alaska had only one violation.
During a news conference on Aug. 27, Duffy specifically called out California, Washington and New Mexico for not enforcing the English-proficiency regulations.
In addition to getting states to enforce English-proficiency regulations at roadside, Duffy acknowledged that drivers who are unable to read road signs and demonstrate basic English skills shouldn’t be in possession of a CDL.
“When an individual comes in to take their test to become a commercial driver, they do a skills test,” Duffy said. “At that point, it would be clear that this driver doesn’t understand all of the road signs and doesn’t speak the language. But, miraculously, they’re passing the skills test. I think any commonsense analysis would say that doesn’t make any sense … How are these tests being administered, and are they following the rules? Is there some gaming of the system that we need to address?”
OOIDA still sounding the alarm
Nearly two decades after filing its 2008 comments to FMCSA, OOIDA continues to advocate for measures that will keep unsafe drivers out of the driver’s seat.
The Association also said that the federal government needs to identify the safety loopholes being exposed through the non-domiciled CDL program. On Aug. 18, OOIDA asked Duffy to immediately suspend states’ ability to issue non-domiciled CDLs. Then on Aug. 21, OOIDA sent letters to 43 governors, asking them to stop issuing non-domiciled CDLs.
“OOIDA has been sounding the alarm about safety concerns involving non-domiciled CDLs, and until questions surrounding this program are addressed, we are asking that you suspend your state’s issuance of these licenses entirely,” the Association wrote. “The safety of America’s truckers and the motoring public should not be a partisan issue.” LL
Land Line Managing Editor Jami Jones contributed to this report.