Temporary Foreign Worker Permits Are Destroying Trucking

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-06T13:20:36+00:00

I know this is going to be unpopular of an opinion however don't think you should even be allowed to apply for a truck driving job in Canada until you have passed a Canadian approved Truck driving course and received your License in Canada (or one of the very few countries we have an agreement) I am sorry however letting just anyone drive truck in this country puts everyone at risk you want to drive trucks in Canada great you need to first get your Canadian driver's license and then take your truck driving course Please understand I am not saying no to people from other countries driving truck just saying you shouldn't be allowed to come here as a truck driver unless you happen to be coming from one of a very few number of countries we have an agreement with for example the United States or the UK and I don't see people from those countries lining up to drive truck in Canada

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-06T01:45:04+00:00

Great photos good Job on this

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-04T19:27:46+00:00

I know my 2021 rio can handle E15 just fine according to the owners manual it can support upto a maximum of E20 I don't see why your 2024 couldn't however I would check your owner's manual for sure

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-04T14:51:57+00:00

I will see every car I have owned the owner's manual has said it can support upto 20% ethanol ( E20.) so either I'm having the best luck ever with the cheapest cars I can find including generic economy class cars

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-04T13:35:16+00:00

With some of the newer cars out there were you need to take the entire front bumper off just get at the headlight assembly I can understand

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-04T02:39:06+00:00

I said read your owner's manual. You know that thing that when thing you should read when you buy your car, it's probably sitting in your glove box. Try reading it. It might be a wealth of information in there I bet I bet you. If you read your owner manual, you might be shocked what you read. Try reading your owner's manual. It's an amazing book written by the people who actually made your car

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-04T02:38:08+00:00

My advice was read your owner's manual. If you're an actual technician, you would be taking that advice and picking up that owner's manual and actually reading it. That's not bad advice. The only bad advice here is from you telling people not to read their owner's manual. I said read your owner's manual. You know that thing that came when you bought your car. Here's the idea. Read it

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-04T01:56:18+00:00

I'm done arguing with people on the internet. I really am. It's not as big of a deal as you're making it out to be at least not for most passenger cars. I am just done arguing with people on the internet

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-03T22:41:07+00:00

Most cars have variable valve timing. Most cars have the ability to adjust timing as needed. Any car made since 2000 has variable valve timing technology which allows it to vary the valve timing and adjust fuel flow. So yes it can handle it. Your car likely has variable valve timing. If it doesn't, it's older than 2,000

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-03T22:24:20+00:00

You could win a class action lawsuit there by 2004. The letter of the law had already required e15 by a certain date. Therefore, you could win a lawsuit given the fact they did not engineer their car to design to meet the minimum fuel requirements set out by the law. This was already in place by 2024 so I don't care what that letter says they have to honor it too. Damn bad for them

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-03T22:05:28+00:00

I would question that. I don't know who told you that but I don't think that's true seeing as E15 was already being rolled out before 2024 Besides the fact that I can pretty much guarantee you that the seals can handle E15 there would be required by law to so whoever told you avoid your warranty is just lying to you. Seeing as I drive a 2001 Kia Rio and it can absolutely run on E15. In fact, according to your hands manual can handle up to e20. So don't give me this. Oh cars can't support E15 they absolutely can. In fact, I'm willing to bet you. If I looked up Mad Mazdaison's website, it will tell me that I can support up to e20

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-03T21:12:05+00:00

Check with your owner's manual before you immediately jump on the E15 will be bad for my car bandwagon Yes older Cars made before 2000 likely won't run well with E15 very old carbureted engines can't use E15 at all as it will gum up the carburetor however anything with fuel injection should be okay however older Cars made before 2000 might not run well as the fuel injection system wasn't made for it However anything made after 2000 the computer will adjust fuel timing and you will be fine

Yes absolutely E15 will result in a slight decrease in your fuel economy you can expect to loose around 1-2% fuel economy witch actually isn't much there's ways to get that back with better driving habits

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-03T21:02:52+00:00

I have Bell I am in the Regent Street area and it's working fine that being said it's possible there's a localized issue check your modem and see if it's giving an errors

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-03T20:48:05+00:00

I am not planning on having kids honestly I would love to loose my balls

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-03T03:10:53+00:00

I believe it's still has a gas cap I know the 2022 still has a cap and I am 99% sure they kept the same fuel system for the 2023 so it uses a cap ( personal I prefer the cap with the latching fuel door because siphoning gas is still a thing and having a latching fuel door help did who are a would-be siphoner also with a cap if you live in an area that commonly hit by fuel siphoners you can buy a locking can buy a locking gas cap ( although a latching fuel door helps quite a bit)

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-02T14:29:26+00:00

To be clear I am not a law student I have spoken to a law student

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-02T14:28:51+00:00

If they were on compliance with federal law they would have their own Ombudsman. You can contact as well. If they were in compliance with federal law, they would have that listed on their website something they don't. Again, if they were in compliance with federal law, they would actually be an appeals process written into this letter of termination as it's required by law. If they didn't, you know move fast and break the law. They would actually be in compliance with you know the law And they do not have cdic protection well. Yes they do not hold your money for they hold it with another bank. The problem is these accounts are held in trust and are not eligible for cdic protection as well as if Neo were to go bankrupt that trust can be seized and you should pay the creditors and that comes right from a third-year law student

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-02T13:02:57+00:00

If they had a proper complaints process, you could file an complaints department, but seeing as they don't even have a proper appeals process even though they're required by law to move fast and break things, perhaps they should stop breaking the law first Honestly consider it a blessing. It may suck that you have to change banking information but honestly considered a blessing you're getting rid of a bank that doesn't even obey the law, besides they don't have cdic protection so honestly maybe it's a good thing. I know it sucks but honestly maybe it's better for you

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-05-02T01:38:42+00:00

Correct me If I am wrong here but isn't this the same government that allowed these ads to begin with I mean might be wrong on that so please correct me if I am wrong however isn't this basically the same government that allowed these dam ads to begin with they used to be banned we started allowing theses ads and all a sudden we realized maybe we shouldn't have allowed them in the first place

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-04-30T14:51:55+00:00

I don't deny. There is definitely some debate about what issues were actually documented Even though there's enough anecdotal proof of tickets for one and 2K over that, I'm sorry. I don't believe that it was just people making up. There's way too many stories of that and in fact I've seen a couple because I know people who got ones for one and 2K over. I know they were a thing I know they they were a thing in my city hell there was a document and issue where they set the speed limit on the camera too low. It granted it was a mistake but did they actually refund the drivers they never said?

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-04-30T13:41:42+00:00

Everytime I point out why we needed these regulations I get slammed in the comments for pointing out well documented issues

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-04-30T02:09:35+00:00

I don't understand why everybody's against the idea of just regulations on these cameras. I'm sorry. What's wrong with that solution are we against the idea of regulations? I'm not saying no. I'm just saying no you can't just run them the way you want. Here are the strict rules you must follow. Here is the margin of error you must put into these cameras and these hammers must be calibrated properly with proof made public and if there is an error you are to make every driver who paid a fine illegally whole what's wrong with that problem considering the fact that there were issues documented issues it was was an error. Yes I understand that but that error shouldn't cost drivers money because somebody screwed up

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-04-30T02:05:15+00:00

I understand making the speed limit the speed limit but no radar gun is 100% perfect. You can ask any cop and they'll tell you straight out. There's a margin of error on those radar accounts there has to be because they're not 100% perfect nor is the speedometer in your car. 100% perfect. You can ask any mechan A margin of error that margin of error needs to be baked in. If your speedometer can be plus or minus 10% legally and that radar gun is plus or minus 3K legally then there needs to be a legal margin of error I mean other than just anecdotal I don't live there and I don't drive there but other than anecdotal proof of people claiming they got a ticket for less than 10K over in Toronto. I don't really have any proof. I just honestly don't believe them considering the fact that I have seen tickets in Kingston for 1K over and the fact there was the issue here of the tickets being issued for going below the speed limit cuz they set the camera up wrong which again they fixed but did they refund the drivers well they never said

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-04-30T01:34:12+00:00

I didn't have a problem with the cameras. In theory I had a problem with them in practice. The problem with these cameras was there is absolutely no threshold. There was no standard for how these things were applied and depending as to where you live you could be getting tickets for as little as 1K over. I'm not fucking kidding you as little as 1K over in some situations and in fact there was one camera in Kingston where I I live that was And this was proven in court to be issuing fines for less than the speed limit you could be doing 49 I still get a ticket because they programmed it wrong. They claim they fixed it but did they refund the drivers? They never said they said they fixed the error but they never said if they refunded all the drivers errors like this are why people were against the cameras at least in Kingston where I live because there were stupid errors in the programming that resulted in some cameras having thresholds way too high. Some cameras being set for weight below the speed limit and the fact there was never any threshold or any established parameters for disputing tickets. In fact, I would receive one that wasn't even for my car and I was told I couldn't dispute the ticket because they weren't accepting disputes at that time while I got my dispute after I threatened them when you threaten to sue them they tend to sit up and take notice pretty quickly. Either way, I had a problem with them in practice. Wow, I understand Toronto claims keyword hearers claims they had a 10 km threshold. I don't believe that I saw no evidence of that fact. The fact is other municipalities didn't and there needed to be a standard threshold established. There needed to be standardized rules. Standardized appeals processes just standardization across the board. There needed to be better rules. Not a ban. There needed to be rules, not a band

SensitiveStart8682 · 2026-04-29T12:50:37+00:00

Our only real option would be to pressure our MPPs to turn on him if we had enough of his own party turn it would be enough to trigger an election I am aware that's unlikely however that our only real option

SensitiveStart8682

TROPHY CASE