Ok. You do need a lesson. A little attitude adjustment. Van Wyk is one of the better companies out here. Look around in the threads for that. Also I run into them quite frequently. Equipment is beautiful and well maintained, drivers are happy and making money AND being treated with respect. You give them a year and they'll teach you to truck and have a higher expectation in companies. Man I had some faith in you before that.
New driver...best company for home time in Virginia (Richmond, Fredericksburg, etc.)?
Discussion in 'Questions From New Drivers' started by bubbagumpshrimp, Nov 2, 2014.
Page 4 of 4
-
-
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
-
I'm not surprised.I applied to van wyk awhile back in person since im only 60 miles from Sheldon and I dated a guy that lived there.I think they wanted me to sign something and I think it was a 1 yr contract or pay so much if you don't complete the contract because I didn't have any exp. been yrs ago but I know something didn't sound right.Im glad I failed their road test.
-
Van Wyk goes to Boston alot from what a driver told me.That one yr commitment has to do with paying for the training,they need reassurance you'll stay.Because van wyk isn't like other companies,they don't just train anyone with a cdl.But I also think if they require a one yr commitment then they should pay for your cdl that you earned from the school you attended.All the starter companies do as long as they are affiliated with that school.
-
All I was trying to do is get across the point that "moraramis" made below. If you don't agree...you're entitled to your opinion.
I have no issue staying anywhere for a year. I have an issue with an employer requiring new hires to sign a one-sided agreement in which only the employer stands to benefit if the employee/employer relationship terminates.
You're right...the employer is making an investment in a new hire. That would be why it pays for a company to weed through applicants and only hire individuals with a demonstrated history of reliability and good judgment (i.e. No job hopping, criminal background check, good MVR). If a company hires individuals whose average tenure with their past employers can be measured in months....and not years...the employer can't be all that shocked when their employees don't stick around for long.
I have no interest in job hopping. If I get in with a company and it's a good fit...I'll stick around for a while (I was with my last employer for over five years). The issue to me is that I want to stay with a company because the work environment is a good fit and I'm afforded the opportunity to remain employed with the company. I don't want to stay with an employer because I literally have no choice but to stay.
Exactly. That is the point I was trying to get across. I have a business and analysis background. The concept of this agreement is absolutely ludicrous to me...from the viewpoint of a potential applicant. It makes perfect sense from the point of view of a business owner though. The driver sticks around past the 12 month mark...you keep a good employee. The driver leaves before he/she hits 12 months...you recoup the cost of training them. So yes...I completely understand why a policy like this would exist. However, the analyst in me would be curious to know how many people were put off by the existence of this agreement. -
I am a similar position as the OP. I have 5 different companies that have offered me a 'conditional hire' letter with the condition being that I come in as a CDL holder. I intend to be coming in not only as a CDL holder, but with the following:
1) CDL A with all endorsements (combinations, air brakes, tankers, HazMat, and doubles/triples (NO PASSENGER, not interested in hauling living cargo))
2) HME and TWIC
3) Passport card for runs into Canada
I have the following companies that have given me this opportunity, listed in order of preference as of now:
1) May
2) Covenant
3) Swift
4) Henderson
5) Western Express
The 3 latter companies have not yet answered my initial questions, and therefore are at the bottom of the list for now.
The question is; since I am tired of changing jobs at no fault of my own, which of these companies would give the best overall first year (and hopefully beyond) experience for the new driver? -
Plympton, which is off of 495... sometimes 3x a week, Midwest drivers rarely do far NorthEast. But I'm about to ask a driver in a thread started 4 years ago about "Signing Something" It doesn't even make sense.
And they run the training truck close to a team truck. You're making them extra coin -
Yup, they do require a commitment. I swear, I worked over there for 3 years and never heard anything about that. But still I would go work for em as a rookie.
-
I went to a 'school' that was contracted to SWIFT in Fontana with TDA under their Veteran's scholarship and only incurred DMV fees and incidental costs (I paid for an extra motel night at their motel before starting) and food while there. After they weeded out the people that failed the physical and/or drug screen, there were 35 in my group; this was further split into 4 students to an instructor on the road and 8 to an instructor for skills... AND this course was supposed to be 2 weeks in length before testing for the CDL. The only people in the group who were successful had prior experience, telling me that the course was not an accelerated (their term) or a crash (our term) course, but better suited to be used as a refresher.
Had I completed the course and came out successfully as a CDL holder, I would have been tied to SWIFT for 13 months. In itself, I saw it as neither a good thing, or a bad thing; it just WAS. It would have given me the time on the road to gather experience and make decisions: not only about what I needed to add within that time, but what path I would want to take.
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
Page 4 of 4