new Minnesota law regarding load damage liability

Too bad its not federal law. I had a whole case of meat rejected because a dipwad lumper ripped a flap on the box. That was at that wakefern warehouse in new jersey.

 

Like the POC in Az. If I put product on your truck in good condition and you sign that it is. When it comes off it better be in the same condition.

I saw nothing about lumpers which would be an extension of carrier employment and not the shippers concern either.

 

I guess the question really is, who supplies the lumper, who does he get his money from and who contracts (in writing) him?

This reads to me that the motor carrier is not responsible if the lumper is connected to the promisee (receiver) unless the carrier has a contract with the promisee(receiver) to use provided lumpers. At least that's what I get from this definition part of that law:

--https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/?id=165&year=2012&type=0

And if the carrier enters into a contract to use "provided" lumpers without it being spelled out that they are not responsible for the lumpers screwing up, then the motor carrier making the contract with the supplied lumper will be liable....whereas if you as a O/O come into a dock with lumpers that you don't provide and don't have a contract with (don't sign anything the receiver tries to give you without reading it) that you pay to unload you, you are not responsible.

Now that's how I read it, but as you point out, it might need to be "clarified" by using simpler language, or by lawsuits asking for clarification.

Why can't these dummies speak plain English?

College degrees and dumb as a brick.