Cargo and property damage paid by company driver

I'm not sure what I am walking into. I am in the middle of something else and noticed the mention. I HAVE NOT read the paper posted and just skimmed over the thread. Lets remember something. Just because a company puts a piece of paper in your face and says sign here does not make that agreement enforceable. The term here to remember is (Enforceable). poof, im out of it!

 

My concern isn’t whether it’s enforceable, but why GTFO mode doesn’t kick in. People actually sign these things?

 

With all due respect six, I think you and I are close to the same age. <born 1958> . Honestly by now you should already know just how brainwashed a lot of these kids are today. When you have football players demanding their (currently active) contracts be redone because they feel they are worth more money, something is bad wrong. At this point I stopped worrying about it. I just try to help and otherwise go watch the ships crossing in and out of Norfolk!

 

Fined for failure to send a Macro on the Qualcomm? Wow.........

 

Found this old article from 2003 on this subject. It seems to indicate that in most states, employers can't deduct damages from your pay unless there was gross negligence (difficult to prove) or criminal behavior. I'll post a few highlights below.. In Wisconsin I noticed that the law there states that no deductions can be made from the driver's paycheck unless the employee authorized it in writing, which is probably where these employers are coming from when asking for it at the orientation.

You May Be Violating State Law By Deducting Driver Wages to Pay for Vehicle Damage

You May Be Violating State Law By Deducting Driver Wages to Pay for Vehicle Damage

Some nationally dispersed fleets include a provision in their fleet policy stating that a driver is liable for wage deductions for damage to his or her company-provided vehicle if it was caused by negligence. However, many fleet managers are unaware that this practice, under certain circumstances, is illegal in some states.

A case in point is the state of California, where employers, in general, are prohibited from making deductions from an employee's wages for damages caused by the employee's negligence. This rule is based on the idea that losses caused by an employee's negligence are a normal cost of doing business and should be borne by the employer.

The DLSE ruled that the employer could not make deductions to compensate for damage caused by an employee's negligence. Such deductions, the DLSE explained, could only be made if the damage was caused by a dishonest or willful act of the employee, or by an employee's "gross negligence." The term "gross negligence" was defined as negligence "which is aggravated, reckless, and flagrant" and refers to a state of mind "that exercise(s) so slight a degree of care as to exhibit a conscious indifference or 'I don't care attitude' concerning the ultimate consequences of (one's) actions.

In New York, an employer may only make paycheck deductions "for the benefit of the employee." Aside from those required by law, deductions are limited to those that are expressly authorized in writing by the employee.

In the state of Oregon, if an employee is negligent and damages company property, the employer cannot deduct the value of the property from the employee's paycheck. However, disciplinary action may be taken and the employer could pursue reimbursement for damages through the courts.

Wisconsin is another state that restricts employee wage deductions. Wisconsin Statute Section 103,455 states: "An employer generally may not make a deduction from wages for defective or faulty workmanship, lost or stolen property, or damage to property unless the employee authorizes the deduction in writing."

 

My guess. Desperation. People that work at such abusive places tend to be people that, by past actions like tickets and wrecks, are not hireable anywhere else.

 

My thought is this:

WHY did this particular carrier feel it necessary to have new hires sign an illegal contract?

Did they have a few egregious cargo claims that were totally preventable? Unsecured loads maybe?

But "Golly Gee! Putting on load locks or straps takes TIME!"

Yep.

Doing your ####ing JOB takes time.

Driving as if you have a load that can get destroyed by taking corners too fast or slamming on the brakes because you can't get it through your thick skull that you need PLENTY of following distance...takes TIME.

All THAT said, the contract itself isn't enforceable. Any competent lawyer could punch holes in it within five minutes before a competent judge.

IMHO the contract is only meant to scare the bejezus out of new hires so they will take time to do their ####ing job.

 

If you're going to be responsible for paying damage to your truck and freight, you mine as well be an O/O.