Co driver gets a false log book citation but my employer is saying the violation is on "ME"

so yo

ur telling me someone takes 3 hours to put xmas lights on there truck. just to show boat in the truck stop. js

 

So the co driver who falsified his logs
And got you fired.
Gets to keep his job and get paid to
Bring you back to the terminal and help
You clean out your truck.
How nice of him.

 

They spent however long is not relevant. And I wasn't replying to that anyway. I was replying to your assertion that all the lights have to work. They don't. Only the required lights have to work. All extra lights can be blown and be fine.

§393.9 Lamps operable, prohibition of obstructions of lamps and reflectors.
(a) All lamps required by this subpart shall be capable of being operated at all times. This paragraph shall not be construed to require that any auxiliary or additional lamp be capable of operating at all times.

Note the bold.

 

I'm still pretty sure the O/P is screwed, because he worked for CRST. One of the (if not THE) STRICTEST contractual carriers in the industry. Here's a letter they will send to the NEW place the O/P tries to hire on to. He's screwed unless he pays them, whether he's driving for them or not.


And on another note, I'm sure y'all heard, CRST won a TON of money from a lawsuit against Swift, for 'poaching' their new hires. Just IMHO.

 

How can he be screwed if they fire him, go get another job. The company finalized the contract, he didn't break it.

 

CRST will monetarily hold him accountable for training. Very well known for that, they are.

 

He was fired...that changes everything.
Can't fire him and say and by the way you may never work again, so just go collect welfare.

 

I would sue them in court so fast it would make their heads spin.

 

There was a thread on here a few years back that CRST wouldn't release the guy's buck'sixty training certificate until he paid them off the value of the 10 months of the contract. I don't recall the outcome, believe the guy quit posting. Wasn't looking good. I'm just stating what I recall, and that letter is from a buddy of mine that runs a company and tried to hire one of their 'priors'. They got crappy real quick.

Wish it better for the O/P.

 

And since it's in the contract and signed by the driver the judge will enforce it. Plenty of examples here showing exactly that.
This is not the non-compete part that may or may not be enforced. This is strictly the cash repayment portion that is very reasonable to require repayment.
I mean it's not hard to get fired and if someone could simply refuse to work, get fired and now not owe the $5,000 they borrowed, how is that right?