Sometimes when I read members here spout the very same arguments to defend the status quo in OTR that were used in the 1930's against ending child labor exploitation, I wonder what about 100% driver turnover do you not understand??
It amazes me that 100% turnover doesn't ring an alarm bell for some.
There's a term for being required to work for free after all. It's called slavery. Prisoners do that, too. It's doubtful to me that FDR ever intended that all these years later interstate truck drivers would be treated as second-class citizens, like prisoners, required to work for free.
Some of us would like to see the upcoming settlement in Quezada v Con-way Freight be the death knell of mileage-only pay where a driver's non-piece-rate work is still required but not paid.
During the Depression, FDR turned to the New Deal and Congress passed law after law to improve conditions in the country only to have the Supreme Court rule them unconstitutional.
In frustration, FDR decided he would 'pack' the Supreme Court until he had enough like-minded justices to preserve New Deal legislation. When Justice Owen Roberts 'switched to save 9' and moved his vote over with the Liberal wing of the Supreme Court, packing the Supreme Court became unnecessary.
The battle for a Federal Labor Standards Act was not over, however.
When it went down to defeat in Congress, instead of in the Supreme Court, the expectation was that the battle for a new wage law that would end child exploitation and set a minimum wage had been lost.
Will Wage and Hour Rumbles... Affect You?
Discussion in 'Experienced Truckers' Advice' started by Victor_V, Nov 3, 2014.
- Thread Status:
- Not open for further replies.
Page 8 of 23
-
-
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
-
"Forced to work for free"
Well.... no one, and I mean no one, is forcing anyone to work for free. If the person hiring on asks how much detention pay is, if they get paid for fuel stops, so on and so forth, and still decided to work there, then they have nothing to complain about.
If a bunch of new hires started turning away from the companies wanting to hire people, because those new drivers wanted to be paid for all hours worked, then the company would probably start changing some things.
Like I said before, you wanna be paid for all hours worked? Get an hourly job... -
I'd like to believe the times are changing, Diesel.
As they need to!! -
Not sure what that has to do with drivers not asking questions or getting an hourly job to be paid for all hours worked.
-
Maybe it's above your pay grade.
Maybe it's lost on you that billion-dollar Con-way with unlimited funds to battle on, with $657-million in cash and equivalents, prefers to throw in the towel and settle Quezada v Con-way Freight rather than risk going to trial.
That smell in the air is something burning, all right. It's--hopefully--a trucking industry practice of carriers paying mileage-only and declaring, "That's enough pay for you, driver!!" -
Above my pay grade? Oh ok.
Or maybe I believe in being paid for being productive which is why I support mileage and percentage pay.
Sure, our industry has issues and something has to be done. Though I don't believe just saying "pay everyone hourly" is going to solve anything -
And that's not what Quezda v Con-way Freight says.
Con-way is likely settling to avoid precedent. It will still have that effect all the same. The death knell for mileage-only, at least in California for now.
Shows the California distinction between piece-rate pay (mileage) and non-piece-rate work has teeth and that carriers have to pay drivers for their non-piece-rate work at no less than State minimum wage.
Ends required work-for-free. -
My personal preference for most employees would be performance based pay. In trucking percentage pay for whatever the load pays would be the most fair for the driver and carrier. If you are a union supporter who likes to "share the wealth" you should like this sort of compensation package. When business and rates are up you make more money. When rates and business is down, you and the company earn less. That is TRUE sharing. But, unions don't want to really share. They only want to share when things are good. Government really needs to get out of the way and allow the free market work.
In previous posts, much was made of the figures about a net profit of $22,000 on $220,000 gross revenue. Were those after tax or pretax earnings? While I question the numbers, if correct, I don't see the problem. There seems to be resentment for a company showing a profit. Without profit there is no investment in companies and without investment there is no need for a business to exist. When people invest their money, sweat and tears into a business, they do so with the expectation of earning a profit. When you take out the profit, there is no incentive for investors to risk their money in a business.
If you believe the posted numbers, you should understand that the net is probably half of what the driver is paid and perhaps only about a third of actual driver compensation. If the driver is paid $45,000, his total compensation, including employer tax contributions, insurance, etc., is likely over $60,000. Compensation is not just what you receive in your check. Those who resent their employer making a profit should ask themselves whether they would invest their money without an expectation of profit. Do you even think your employer should make a profit? If you do think your employer deserves to earn a profit from their investment, then what do you consider a fair return on their investment? If you don't think your employer deserves to earn a profit or return on their investment, why?
With some people, work has become a four letter word, as has making a profit. Without profit companies can't pay for your nice truck and the maintenance to keep it going. Without profit companies cannot afford to pay for your insurance or other benefits. Do you really expect any employer to give employees ALL of their profit?
Performance pay has worked for well over half a century. Perhaps, rather than resent your employer for making a profit, you should concentrate on how you can increase your value to the company. One thing I can tell you with absolute certainty is that loyal, highly productive employees are valued by most companies. Some drivers do their best, treat their employer and shippers with respect and take care of their assigned equipment. They take care of themselves and put forth a neat and professional appearance. On the other side, some drivers abuse their equipment, cuss their dispatchers and disrespect shippers. The image they project is anything but professional. Which do you think will be most valued? Which driver do you think will be more likely to receive the bonus or raise? Instead of complaining and finding ways in which to undermine your employer, try developing a positive attitude and see if you can find ways in which to do your job better.
If you don't think you are being fairly compensated, you have options. You can look for a different company. If you want to be paid hourly, you could look for a local driving job. Most of those local, hourly jobs require you to really hustle. You can also buy your own truck, get your authority and see if you can make more running your own business than working for another carrier. I grew up in a time when we worked hard and if we didn't like the pay we found another company or started our own business. In my case, I found running my own business fit my personality and needs best.
I think rates have been too low for many years. I would like to see the minimum haul rate to match the cost of a gallon of fuel. That isn't likely to happen with the over capacity we have currently. So, I must deal with reality. I must deal with the situation as it is, not as I would like it to be. California may attempt to force their will on the rest of the country. It hasn't worked well with their CARB mess. Many have just taken California off their cab cards or stopped servicing the state. The rest of the country hasn't followed California's lead when it comes to their CARB rules. Most realize that their assumptions are based upon false science. It is cheaper to stay out of California than to comply with their onslaught of never ending regulations and anti business climate. Historically, I don't see how California can legally force non California based carriers to comply with their labor laws. In fact, over the road carriers come under the auspices of the federal government due to interstate commerce.
When any driver comes into this business, they should know how they will be compensated. If they don't like the way drivers are paid, then they really should not enter the business. There are plenty of jobs that pay hourly. Most won't start employees at $30-35,000/year. And, most won't give those employees a $5,000-10,000 raise the second year. Most of those hourly jobs won't allow employees to earn over $50,000 in the second or subsequent years. For over the road, hourly pay simply won't work. If it ever came to that point, I would expect a dramatic drop in driver productivity.DrtyDiesel Thanks this. -
G/MAN, hope you don't mind if I don't read your post.
At a glance I can tell it's same as you've said before and before and before.
'Drivers know what they're paid, yada, yada.'
Driver mileage pay and required work-for-free are changing.
It's coming to an outfit near you. And in time, mileage-only will be banned just as spreading second-hand smoke around in restaurants has been.Boardhauler Thanks this. -
I agree with G/man, percentage would be the way to go in my opinion. Performance based pay seems to be very fair. If you work hard and earn that paycheck, it's good on you. If you wanna be a slouch and still expect to be paid top dollar, tough luck.G/MAN and Raiderfanatic Thank this.
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
Page 8 of 23
- Thread Status:
- Not open for further replies.