I have a buddy who drives for Maverick, he was in an accident about 2 months ago. A older lady pulled out in front of him at a stop light, He had the green she had the red. he was Going less then 45 Mph (the speed limit) and struck her almost broad side. Unfortuantely the older women died shortly after.

Now all investigations have been done and he was found not at fualt almost instantly thanks to the witnesses. (logsrus and his logs where perfect, I had just spoke to him the night before telling him he must keep them up to date, he is one of those guys who may go all day then fill it out, I have broke him of that and just in time)


The question is "is he going to have an issue getting a job in the future when he decides to leave Maverick?" He has been told several things where he would not be able to leave and find a job for a long time due to the fatality.

Back in the 80's I drove for a company that had a driver that was involved in a fatal accident. The driver not at fault was going into a curve. A young kid had a fast car and could not hold the curve. He crossed the line and struck the semi. The kid was killed. The driver was determined not at fault by the state police. Our company's safety dept however ruled that it was preventable had the trucker been going slower he could have stoped. Stupidest thing I ever heard of. They let the driver go. Not sure if he ever found a driving job again. Hey if you are out there on the board drop me a PM I would love to hear from you. Drivers initials was B. G. (notarps)

__________________
My childhood dream of becoming a truck driver turned into a nightmare!

According to safety departments and insurance companies, nearly all mishaps are preventable, i.e. deer collisions could be prevented by going slower, I have had deer jump out of the ditch from behind me at intersections, only by hitting the brakes when i saw it flash by was I able to avoid damage, someone runs a light, you should have been driving slower so you could have stopped in time, and then you could stop for every light in the string doing that, and probably be shot by someone stuck stopping behind you.

Heck, i don't know, but I have a saying, "The worst crimes are committed by people wearing suits and uniforms."

I understand what you are saying, but to fire a driver for it when a, he was not speeding and b, he never crossed the line. I mean I am sorry about the kid, but the kid was going to fast and lost control. He could not hold the curve. It happens everyday. All of us did stupid things growing up, but it is bad enough that the driver will always see the flash back in his mind.

Terminate his job and maybe his career? Companies that do this might do so to make them look better in the public eye and maybe they thought it would make it look right. To me it just makes them look more vulnerable for a lawsuit. They fired the driver, so it must have been neglect. Is how it makes it look to me.

__________________
My childhood dream of becoming a truck driver turned into a nightmare!

All I was referring to is how the suits rationalize things, I sure as heck don't agree with them. As far as I'm concerned you are right about appearing guilty by getting rid of a driver even though the police exonerated him. It sounds like what some companies do now, any accident for any reason, and you can't drive for them for years or maybe never if there was a fatality.

Young car and motorcycle drivers have lots of accidents and sometimes they don't survive them. It's part of the price we pay to be able to come and go as we please, but there were accidents long before there were cars and trucks, and people died of them.

Getting back to the thread, if a driver wasn't charged in a fatality accident, that should be the end of it, unless the driver feels the need for counseling.
I probably would have wanted counseling for something like that. You can also be sure that if there was a fatality, that rig would have been gone over with a fine tooth comb and any thing below standard would have been cited, eye witnesses or not.

I worked with a guy who had someone deliberately pull out in front of him to end his own life. They found that out when they searched the car and found a note stating that he had found out his cancer was terminal, and decided he wasn't going out that way.

Thankfully there were witnesses in this situation too. The driver however didn't fare to well. He wasn't hurt real bad physically, but mentally he was shot. He literally couldn't drive over 45mph in his truck, and while doing it his nerves where shot the whole time. He no longer drives.

Employment with another company shouldn't be a problem since the accident wasn't his fault.

Around five years ago, I was sitting at a traffic light waiting to make a left turn into a distribution center. A drunk driver, being chased by the local cops, ran right into the back of my trailer.
He was so drunk he never saw me. His speed was estimated by the cops at 55-60 in a 45 mph zone. There were no skid marks and he tore off the ICC bumper, went under the trailer, hit the tandems and bounced back out.
They had to cut him out of his car and air evac him to the hospital. He survived but it sure shook me up.
After waiting for the investigation to end and talking to DOT, I took the trailer back to the terminal which was less than a mile away.
It was listed as non-preventable and dispatch gave me the rest of the day off. This happened at 6:30 AM and I was back driving the next day.
I was surprised the DOT didn't want a pee test. They didn't ask and I didn't offer.
Funny thing was, it was a four lane road and he could have passed me on the right....guess he was way too drunk.
I guess the point is not all companies are out to stick it to the driver.

FYI: I do believe the reg is you have to be cited and someone injured or towed. I am going off memory, so don't hold that to me but I am almost sure you need 2 negatives to need a drug/alcohol test. I am to lazy to look it up right now!

__________________
"Sometimes I wonder if men and women really suit each other. Perhaps they should live next door and just visit now and then."

Ever thought insurance companies will do anything for a buck.....meaning possibly if that driver stayed on with the company, it could give the insurance company the chance to make more money, thus companies barely making it have to let the driver go, with or without telling the driver why or using another excuse.......also what happens when the traffic light turns yellow just at the right time you can't stop in time, and have to run a red.......maybe its something along the lines of Murphy's Law.....if it can happen it will happen, hold on tight its Life...

There are always two (and sometimes more) sides to every story. The issue with any trucking accident is SafeStat. This "tool" lists all the information available about any trucking company with a DOT number. OOS violations, both driver and vehicle, accidents, etc. Even if an accident is listed as "non-preventable" it shows up on SafeStat. Insurance companies use this info to determine rates and DOT uses the info to determine whether or not a truck will be pulled over at a scale for an inspection.

Given the above, when a driver has an accident, what was his/her history? The company I work for does not routinely fire a driver for an accident unless that driver has a pattern of incidents such as log violations, excessive speed, etc. To say the driver in the fatality was let go because of that one accident may not be entirely accurate.

As to whether or not someone will be able to find a driving job after a "non-preventable" fatality accident is concerned, we have to get approval from our insurance company any time we want to hire someone with "issues" on his/her MVR. Our rates are influenced by the quality of drivers we hire. So, too, are our operational expenses...

Would we hirea driver with a non-preventable fatal? Sure, if that was the only mark on his record.