That’s seriously messed up- even if the candidate is unemployed?!? Seems like the company they were under contract with should be required by law to re-hire them, then. “When considering hiring new drivers, defendants communicate with each other to determine whether an applicant is under contract with any trucking company. If they are, companies refuse to hire the driver, despite whether the person is unemployed and otherwise meets the company’s hiring criteria. Plaintiffs state that this practice violates state and federal antitrust laws.” Seems to me that that would infringe upon one’s rights to gainful employment. I suppose I should be glad I won’t owe my soul to a company for my CDL then
Some companies likely make more off of their cdl schools than their new drivers actually hauling loads. Especially when you consider state subsidies for placing people in jobs.
That driver is under contract. I'm guessing to fulfill the requirements to pay off CDL training. Perhaps that driver should fulfill that contract before looking to make a change?
They couldn't care less. I've heard some of them get money from the government to help them out since they're putting people to work. Not sure how true that is tbough. Chinatown is right, there are many drivers that stay with those companies for years. They make it work. They may even like it. All of those companies have people that are ambassadors for them. Many of those companies are so large they have many different divisions to satisfy different drivers' needs. I remember coming across a driver for Schnieder who has driven with them for 35 years. He was from Alabama. Megas will get a negative reputation because folks only leave reviews to complain for the most part. I remember talking with another guy who had driven with Marten for 18 years at the time. I can't simply can't imagine that all these companies don't have at least a fraction of their fleet who have been their for years. Every company has ambassadors.