Attitude problem ?

I never have problems in California..you ghetto dwellers from the east can eat ####!

 

Yep 559 area code is Cal

 

The Coercion law is only applicable to the driver's employer . It becomes a cause of action for a whistleblower case if a driver is forced by their company or employer , refuses and then suffers an adverse employment action... A loading facility or a receiver is not the employer in this situation. So even if they act coercive , they cannot be held liable under the coercion law. Put it this way... the coercion law is all about employer retaliation. The receiver or loading facility is not capable of retaliating against a driver in a tangible way --they cannot directly fire the driver for "misconduct" or discipline the driver, or anything like that. Now if the driver complains to the dispatcher, and the dispatcher tells them, "make it happen or else (even if you're running out of hours) ," and then you get fired down the line , then that scenario is in line with the coercion law...and they're caught up on an osha 11(c) case probably

 

If that's the case, then why does the law specifically cite shooters and reciever as well as others.

Coercion occurs when a motor carrier, shipper, receiver, or transportation intermediary threatens to withhold work from, take employment action against, or punish a driver for refusing to operate in violation of certain provisions of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs), Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMRs) and the Federal Motor Carrier Commercial Regulations (FMCCRs). Coercion may be found to have taken place even if a violation has not occurred. An example of coercion is when a motor carrier terminates a driver for refusing to accept a load that would require the driver to violate the hours of service requirements. The following must have occurred in order for coercion to have existed:

• A motor carrier, shipper, receiver, or transportation intermediary request a driver to perform a task that would result in the driver violating certain provisions of the FMCSRs, HMRs, or the FMCCRs;
• The driver informs the motor carrier, shipper, receiver, or transportation intermediary of the violation that would occur if the task is performed, such as driving over the hours of service limits or creating unsafe driving conditions; and
• The motor carrier shipper, receiver, or transportation intermediary make a threat or take action against the driver’s employment or work opportunities to get the driver to take the load despite the regulatory violation that would occur.

To address the problem of coercion, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) adopted the Prohibiting Coercion of Commercial Motor Vehicle Drivers (Coercion Rule). The Coercion Rule explicitly prohibits motor carriers, shippers, receivers and transportation intermediaries from coercing drivers to operate in violation of certain FMCSA regulations, including the drivers' hours-of-service limits, the commercial driver's license (CDL) regulations, the associated drug and alcohol testing rules, HMRs, and some of the FMCCRs. The Coercion Rule allows drivers to report incidents of coercion to FMCSA and authorizes FMCSA to issue penalties against motor carriers, shippers, receivers, or transportation intermediaries that have coerced drivers.

Coercion

 

the coercion law is a joke. it'll be enforced as such.

you are gonna have drivers calling FMCSA consantly saying they were victims of the coercion law because their company wanted them to leave on sunday and they didn't feel like it,and the company said they'd be fired for refusing a load....

we had the same crap with the 34 hour restart. guys didn't want to work they'd claim they needed a 34 that they clearly did not. i had one guy threaten to cal the dot on me for not giving him has mandatory 34 after doing a 3 day regional load. i asked him waht exactly he was gonna report. he said i wasn't giving him his mandatory 34. i said it's not mandatory and you don't need one,but please call them.

 

That's why it's suggested that if you're gonna make a complaint using the coersion law, you had better have your proof before you even contact them

 

oh i agree. truck drivers are gonna try to hide behind it when they don't like the load they're assigned.

 

Two words - Vicarious liability

Here is what I consider a problem; when those shippers hold you - a driver - up an unreasonable time to load or unload and you are forced to move and you are a cause of an accident, then that shipper has a liability involved by their forcing you off their property.

This sounds farfetched but C H Robinson got sued for an accident that they had nothing to do with, but a shipper who is holding up drivers has a lot to do with the accident.

 

The problem is getting the shipper/reciever into court. Schneiders tried it once or twice and the judges laughed so hard you'd have thought it was an episode of Night Court.

 

No that's not a problem, it is the lawyer or law firm for the victims who needs to include the shipper in a lawsuit, it has already been in the courts and could be used again.

The other thing is congress get off their *** and create a very simple law to put the responsibility right into the hands of the shippers.