Frozen trucker case

Plus he's a Democrat and it is his duty to find a reason not to approve of a Judge nominated by a Republican.
So it's not about the trucker as the case has already been decided, I think.
I used to like Franken's comedy, its hard to believe he can be mature and serious,

 

I can't believe i miss jessie....

 

Their is an exception to this law because he froze the judge still sided with Transam which is absurd and the other 6 judges on this case sided with the driver.I think the trucker won.Sometimes you have to look beyond the law when it comes to a life and death situation.

 

This should not be a controversary, you know if you are going to freeze you did what you have to, job, dispatch shipper etc all be ######. You would be yourself ###### soon enough if you did not get somewhere warm.

A senate committee is not the sort of place to talk over things that have been done in law for better or worse because chances are no one inside that chamber and half the USA myself included never heard about this case.

And yes Ive had stuck brakes in winter, get under there and beat them off. Get run over too. Thankfully snow was deep enough as not to hurt much. Ive also froze. There are a number of things you can do inside a cold truck to stay alive for a while. But not forever.

As far as the firing, if they fired me for something that minor. then It is a great loss and tragety for that stupid trucking company to fire me. It's over and I move on. Hopefully the next moron to freeze in my old tractor wont die in it.

As far as fuel... there is always some savings where a hundred dollars cash goes into the tank where necessary at empty, company policy be ######. I don't care if I got paid back or not, That fuel = life and no stinking policy will keep me from finding some where possible.

 

It wasnt life or death. Your buying hype patty. He could have called a cab, the cops, 911, a hook of his own, a outside road service for fuel, bobtail to a shop.... oh wait, he did. Why in good god should the law side with him to keep his job? What exception? The law he is using is the one that protects us from having to drive unsafe or illegal equipment

 

He sued transam for fireing him not try to get his job back.He calls cab he still would have got fired.What is 911 suppose to do.Christ sakes he was there for hours waiting for brkdown and his dispatcher could care less.No driver should defend companies like this.

 

Right to work states need no reason. Cab call would have got him fired? So you know the driver? Whats 911 supposed to do? Hello patty! He said he had slured speach and couldn't feel fingers and toes. Its called a medical emergency, and you would be hard pressed to be fired for having a ambulance take you in for hypothermia. Im not defending trans am. Read my posts. Im just saying there is no law, nor exception that protects his choice. If however he called 911, he would have been covered

 

A court's job is NOT to "look beyond the law", but rather to apply the law as written to the given situation. It is the responsibility of the legislative branch to write the law, NOT the judicial branch. Bottom line here is that the law says you cannot be fired for refusing to drive an unsafe vehicle. The driver was NOT fired for that. Instead, he chose to operate the vehicle in an unauthorized manner. There is NO LAW preventing a company from firing a driver for that reason.

On to another point, if he WAS suffering from hypothermia, he shouldn't have been driving. Some of the early symptoms include dizziness, fatigue, confusion, and loss of coordination. Are you in compliance with §392.3? Once the company becomes aware that you may be impaired, THEY CANNOT permit you to operate the truck. You choose to drive anyway? Bam. Fired. And they have every reason under the regulations to do so. Granted, there is an exception to THAT regulation which makes an exception for "grave emergencies" allowing for the vehicle to be driven to the nearest place at which that hazard is removed...but again, that regulation wasn't the point of contention in the lawsuit.

As I posted in the other thread on this topic, though, I don't see why the driver bothered to sue in the first place. Personally, if that's the way a company is treating me, I'd be parting ways before they had the opportunity to fire me. My #1 priority whenever I roll out is to get back home safely. Nobody looking to jeopardize that is worth my time or troubles...not when another job is only a phone call away. Hell, I quit a job once, returned their truck, rented a car, and drove home all because they wanted to lay me over in Laredo over a weekend I had other plans back at the house. Took a week off (because I had to keep the car that long due to the miles I put on it), made 1 phone call, and started working elsewhere the following Monday.

There is no reason to tolerate BS.

 

Agreed. Functioning defrost is required. He should've refused the truck before he got into the mess.