Are You Ready for Roehl's PreNup Agreement?

That's why I am saying this contract is most likely invalid by any court it sees unless there are provisions to protect the driver from abuse and manipulation of the contract. If it's fair for both parties and is a mutually beneficial contract, I have no qualms and you can ignore any of my opposition towards this issue. But if it's slanted towards only one parties benefit than I stand by what I have said.

If I am agreeing to not leave you until X-amount of days/years. I will honour it, or face penalty BUT I want a guaranteed salary and/or miles, and not be able to be fired because my breathe smells like onions this morning, otherwise it's too one sided and open to nefarious abuses and fraudulent behaviour.

A one-sided contract is not valid or enforceable. A contract is a mutual agreement of terms/conditions & mutual benefits and obligations, not a slave pact.

 

You're not a driver yet. So let me give you a little advice. The best you're ever gonna get in this industry. You. Cut. Your. Own. Deal. Learn how to work. The biggest problem with trucking is the drivers. And that's the truth. I cut my own deal by striving to be better than everyone else. And that's not saying I am. But it's what I strive for. You are my competition, so to speak. Every driver who is at the company I work for is my competition. I want to be better, run harder, be safer, more miles, etc, than every driver at Lessors Inc. Including my friends. People think that the bare minimum is ok. It's not ok. You want a great paycheck and a new truck and better loads? Learn how to work kid.

 

If companies hired people with reliable work history (people that measure their average employment tenure in years....rather than months) and treated their employees well, they wouldn't have a turnover issue. I'm sorry, but there are a LOT of turds in the trucking industry.

Companies can't hire guys that jump from job to job like a prostitute hops from pogo stick to pogo stick and then act shocked when their turnover rate is high. They can't then institute policies like this one...which are directed at the job hoppers you're talking about...and expect people like me (reliable work history and a willingness to be loyal to an employer that treats me right) to even consider signing something like that.

My company (my first/current trucking job) requires recent CDL hires to complete a training program. It costs them money, but they look at their employees as an investment. They pay us well, treat us well, etc. Driver turnover is very low. That's coming back to my original point...hire decent people and treat them well and they won't #### on you by quitting when the first new/flashy job comes along.

 

That's no different than any other industry or life endeavour, and believe me I worked hard in the oilfields working 24-40 hrs straight with only a few 15 min naps spread out which allows me to live a rather easy life now, But we're not talking about work ethic in which I agree 100% with you. What I am saying unless this contract protects the drivers from abuse then it is invalid. They can easily put a non-performance clause to fire the lazy ones and charge them the 3k, but not if they just don't like your face or sound of your voice.

The whole issue with me is they want the right to fire without-cause & charge you the 3k, that's my issue with it. Not work ethic, or a guy who is running people over, etc, those are valid reasons, but "with-out cause" plus a monetary obligation for discharge is open for way too much abuse.

 

No, it's not what I'm saying.

I think that this is akin to wrapping a leaking pipe in duct tape instead addressing the real problem. Companies with high turnover need to take a serious look at WHY they are losing drivers and WHERE are they losing drivers to. Then they need to make adjustments if they want to reduce turnover. All this reimbursement policy will do is push the problem a month or two down the road. Instead of quitting after 3 months more new hires will wait until they hit 75,001 and then quit. It looks like Roehl has done the math and figured that 75,000 is the break even point and they don't care if they lose new hires after that. To me that's bad business- both economical and ethical.


I think that policies like this ferment an us versus them mentality between drivers and office staff. Dispatchers/fleet managers/ driver leaders (whatever you want to call them) should be fighting for their drivers and listening to their drivers needs. A good driver manager will help a driver be successful - or if the driver is not capable of success the driver manager should drop him like a bad habit (we've all met THAT GUY). A driver leader should notice the signs of a driver looking for greener pastures and take steps to keep the driver. Companies can look at the whole data set and identify when new hires are most likely to quit and time employee appreciation (company wide and individual). Instead Roehl is creating an environment of "you must work for us or pay us".

Joseph said something along the line of "drivers are the problem". To a point I agree. CDL training needs to me more rigorous. Companies involved in for profit cartage should not be allowed to run CDL "Schools". Drivers should be required to do their CDL training in the state of residence. WIA grants should be restricted to schools following a PTDI curriculum and tied to CDL pass rate/attempt and final passing score. Companies should not be given 'kickbacks' for hiring inexperienced drivers - especially due to the 'driver shortage'. Companies need to be more restrictive on who they invite to orientation in the first place and much more restrictive on who they actually hire. If getting in takes diligent effort then I think people would take their job more seriously and understand that job hopping is not in their best interest.


I think that contracts should be a two way street - an expression of mutual expectations and obligations. If a company wants to add a clause such as length of employment then the company needs to give the employee some additional guarantees or compensation. Not having seen the contract and not having any details it's hard to judge the merits of this particular situation. Turnover is an industry wide problem caused by many factors - some driver based, some company based. As an industry we need to change our behaviors to eliminate job hopping. There is no magical solution to slowing driver turnover but forcing reimbursement for company orientation is not going to be effective in my opinion.

 

I hate to tell you this, but unfortunately, most of the turds in trucking are behind the wheel. There's entirely too many guys who job hop their entire driving career. Try hiring a decent driver sometime... most of the applicants will have multiple jobs in every calendar year going back the entire 10 years they have to put on the app. It's like the old joke, if everywhere you go people treat you terrible, maybe it ain't them with the problem. We, as a society, no longer have the patience to see the long term. Everything is "What have you done for me lately?" Strategic thinking is a thing of the past, lest the market punishes you for a bad quarter, even if that bad quarter means a windfall down the road. Drivers are the same, they'll quit over a bad week.

This isn't excusing the abuse the megas heap on noobs, by any measure, but there is plenty of blame to go around as to why drivers are treated the way the are. Once upon a time we were just given a list a fuel stops to use, we never even had fuel cards, it was on us if we ran out of fuel. But too many guys would buy without thought as to what it cost the company, and the nanny state of the megas is the end result. Out-of-route miles, same thing. As long as you kept within a certain percentage of pay miles, nobody cared how you ran. Just be on time. Guys running 500 miles OOR to sneak home took care of that, too.

So the reality is that the drivers before you have largely made the companies what they are, and it's vicious cycle. The more you nanny someone, the less they are going to do on their own, further increasing the workload on the DM's who have to do all but tell some of these guys when to stop and take a crap. And you guys are only going to further the cycle...

 

That sullivan trucking public pooper may have taken care of that as well LOL...Rules are generally made because of a few rotten apples and that ruins it for the rest of the bunch, it sucks sometimes regardless of what industry you're in even entertainment. A lot of bands can't even use so much as a fog machine on stage now because of great white and similar incidents, that's just how the world works. Now you have to deal with ATF all the time, even if you're not using stadium size pyros.

 

One issue with turnover isn't pay, its that new drivers with no experience or real world knowledge of OTR trucking go through training and get on their own and find out that they can't hack it.

They get home sick and miss being social. So they quit and go back home. I had a friend who wanted to be otr, got his cdl and went to work for Stevens. Was on the truck two weeks and realized it wasn't for him so he quit.


A guy in my orientation class at roehl screwed himself over. He quit a month in because of an issue with his bank that he blamed roehl for. So he went to work for western express, was there for a month and left to go to a local company. Got into a wreck and got fired. Tried going back to roehl but got turned down due to his wreck. Then went to work for knight, after that I think he ended up going on unemployment. In 6 months he hopped around to four companies, all of which lost money on him.

So because of drivers like him I'm surprised more companies don't require you to sign a contract.

 

I am not defending anything of that nature just so everyone knows that now. quitters, laziness, whiners, theives, drug addicts, I am not defending or talking about, just terms of the contract as we understand it now.

I wouldn't mind if all companies went to contracts to be honest, but again it has to protect both parties from getting screwed. I think drivers would feel more comfortable knowing they are guaranteed X-Amount of dollars for X-amount of Months/years. The companies can still terminate for drugs, accidents,late deliveries etc all your typical stuff you'd expect to get fired for. It could put both sides at more ease. Company knows driver is going to work for X-amount of time & Driver knows he's guaranteed X-amount of dollars.

I know all about homesick people, we dealt with that in ND all time and people would make a quick 10k and bounce or would work for maybe a month and leave. Some lasted 1 day or a few days. Most of us did not care though because we'd work 30 days straight and take 14 days off to fly home. This why I am saying Roehl could be great if their pay was better. The home time is very attractive. Knight is also a good one for hometime as well. That whole staying out for 4 months to get 2 days off is for the birds.

 

I agree with you for sure.

The main reason I liked roehl was the home time. You won't get rich but you won't get burnt out as easily.