Due to the electronic monitoring he couldn't just drive those extra 20 minutes and sleep in his own bed.
I know I'd be pretty mad.
The limits on time is not meant to be "norms" but extreme cases so if they are hit daily thats an indication the the culture in the industry is rotten more then anything else.
Sure, an edge case. But inflexible rules lead to more edge cases.
And yeah, adding flexibility is very difficult, simple rules are better as such.
And of course, if they add an exception for drivers to get home, I'm sure the companies would exploit that in their route planning.
Not easy either way.
Or alternately a normal working day is 8 hours, and a 10 hour daily limit allows a supremely flexible 2 hours of overtime :)
More pay is the answer here, as usual.
If he wants to get home, he can move closer or find another route. Or park the truck and drive his personal vehicle.
As mentioned his counterpoint is that he'd sleep better at home, so the next day he'd be more rested than he currently gets when he has to sleep in his cab. So in effect it's trading less safe driving today vs less safe driving tomorrow.
Anyway, I'm not at all against regulations in this field. Drivers have been overworked hard and a tired driver on the road, regardless of occupation, is dangerous.
The "unsafety" of driving was non-zero all along, and the longer he goes without a rest break make it climb ever so higher. Saying that this factor was safe when it was 0.9000 but as soon as it rolled over to 0.9001 it was unsafe is asinine.
Likely, enforcing such a rest stop could make it more unsafe... if after the rest he was in a hurry to head home, or groggy from an impromptu nap, or even if driving or lighting conditions had changed.
> If he wants to get home, he can move closer or find another route.
Neither of these are practical, in the "completely unachievable in the real world by real people" meaning of the word.