Mother sues trucking company

Unfortunately common sense isn't so common anymore.

 

All this talk about juries and trials, this case isn't going to trial. They bring these cases for the settlement that will be coming or more likely they already received a settlement offer and this is their way of saying add some 0s. Companies generally settle to stay away from the limelight and bad press. If the driver is eventually charged and the companies really want to fight they can win. All they have to do is prove that the driver was violating either a law or company policy at the time. There is a little more to it looking at the drivers history and discipline in the past but if the driver himself is at fault the company can get away scot free.

 

BOTH are well known bottom feeder companies? I wasn't aware that Total was considered such....Why do you think that?

 

Some of their hiring requirements, 3 accidents in 3 years is ok, 3 tickets in 3 years is ok. DUI over 3 years old is ok.
Minimum 1 year experience is acceptable. Minimum driver age is 22. Sounds like a bottom feeder company to me.

 

This sounds like so many aspects of life. So many standards and expectations have been lowered or eliminated EVERYWHERE. We just don't expect as much out of people and from employees as we used to. We don't expect politicians and entertainers and sports figured to be role models anymore. And this has carried on down to hiring qualifications and expectations for most all employment sectors.

 

If the driver alone is at fault the company does not get away scot free. Where did you get the idea the company has no liability if the driver alone caused the accident?
The company you work for is liable for the actions of it's employees. That goes for any business. The reason companies settle out of court is because they know a jury
could hit them with a huge financial judgement. They know it's cheaper to settle out of court then to let a judge or jury decide the penalty.