If you look at the suit, taxes were mentioned as something they want to collect from Swift. About the only taxes that I can think of that they would want to collect would likely be payroll and income taxes. The only way they would be able to collect employment taxes is if they were successful in having these lease operators classified as employees rather than independent contractors. If they can have the lease operators classified as employees then they could collect all payments, insurance and other expenses that they paid during the lease. It isn't ignorance, but being able to read, unless of course, you can think of other taxes that these lease operators would want to collect from Swift.
Lawsuit Against Swift Transportation Forced labor Minimum wageThis lawsuit is brought
Discussion in 'Swift' started by Gary7, Jan 18, 2012.
Page 11 of 15
-
-
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
-
You are exactly right. The first red flag to me was, they would not give me a copy of the agreement for my lawyer to review. I was not even looking at the lease deal, I was looking at the 2yr finance purchase they had.
Last edited: Jan 23, 2012
Hammer166 and bullhaulerswife Thank this. -
If you agree to be paid as an independent contractor, whether as a driver, lease operator or owner operator, then you need to abide by your agreement. It doesn't make any difference what the IRS guidelines state. If you agree to the terms of a contract, then keep your word. If you don't understand a contract, then don't sign it. If you are not allowed to show a contract to a lawyer before signing, then don't sign it. I won't sign any contract that I don't agree with the terms or if I can't have my lawyer look it over. If you sign a contract and then decide later that you don't like the terms, then you have noone to blame but yourself. I don't have to read a contract to know that if you don't agree with the terms or understand what you are signing, then you don't sign it. These people read and supposedly understood what they were signing. At least that is the agreement that they signed. Once they found that they didn't like the terms or that they may not have been cut out for running a business, then they tucked their tail between their legs and ran the the nearest lawyer to have them beat up on Swift. These former lease operators want to change the relationship between the carrier and lease operators where they are paid an hourly wage. According to what I read, that is also part of this lawsuit. This industry is exempt from the labor laws. These people need to suck it up and go on with their lives.
Injun Thanks this. -
Bottom Line
Want to avoid getting burned by a lease-purchase agreement?
It's simple. Just don't sign on. -
And if you do anyway, accept the responsibility.
G/MAN Thanks this. -
If anyone is thinking about doing a lease purchase OOIDA will look over your contract before you sign, if you are a member. You may even be able to call them and ask about a particular carrier and their lease purchase programs. I am sure that they have a rather extensive list of carriers that have done them.
Injun Thanks this. -
-
-
truckerdave1970, TruckrsWife and otherhalftw Thank this.
-
I believe the definition of a "fool" is relative. Fools come in all shapes and sizes. You have one type of "fool" who signs a contract that they might not fully understand, and ends up living with the consequences of that action, which they do. Then you have another kind of fool who, having full knowledge of the amount of money they have invested in their rig, and know full well about the leasing company's liability in the product they're hauling, take it out and see how fast she can go on the open highway, going over 100mph for stretches........just for ##### and giggles. That's why I say the definition of "fool" is relative.
scottied67 Thanks this.
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
Page 11 of 15