Not Eligible for Rehire

Truth is an absolute defense to libel and slander claims. Period.

Not for Intentional or Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage, for example. And that's just one cause of action.

And truth has to be PROVEN.

When a company provides ANYTHING above 'yes, CJ drove a truck for us' the exposure begins because there are always 2 sides to a story. The estimate of damage may be wrong, or disputable. The customer complaints may be bogus. The claims of late without notice may be exaggerated.

In fact, an employer going into that kind of detail is just asking to get their knuckles wrapped. Will likely pay $$ to settle.

Do they want to defend each of these 'claims' in a court of law? Because by making them, they could be forced to attempt to do so, have specifically opened themselves up to all sorts of Discovery, Requests for Admissions, Interrogatories. Takes time and $$ to defend. Big distraction.

Not very smart. Smart employers don't retaliate.

 

Then say so if absolutely pressed. Being defensive suggests you are hiding something.......but don't sweat this CJ. Drivers are desperately needed all over....even Walmart is on CNN looking.

Carriers hire on the numbers. They pull every report they can and make a decision on what they see. A good employer will see right through the not eligible statement.

If your DL, PSP and DAC is good then it's pretty well set. What they don't like is job hoppers like every 6 months or 3 in 5 etc. There is actually software they can buy that predicts if you will stay or not. Heard of Stay Metrics?

Here's one that really teaks me off: Under the FCRA they can pull your credit....and see what you owe and spend.....like it's any of their business and use that information to make their offer. You may not get what others have gotten in the past because you don't owe a bunch of money OR you might not get an offer at all because you spend / owe to much.....therefore need to much and not stay for their cheap wages.

Not to worry though...you only find this BS in the megas with high turnover.

Good luck

 

Ahhh yea, they say I'm ineligible for rehire because they wanted me to run over my hours,they wanted me to "free" work, they wanted me to stay out on the weekends, and then they yelled at me for being late when it was a 700 mile run they wanted me to complete in 6 hours ...So I went home and quit and abandoned their truck.Oh and if you play the same games with me like they did, I will abandoned your truck too...understand??..hehe

 

And defamation, which is what most lawsuits regarding negative references are filed under.

Take the example I gave earlier:

"CJ worked for us from x to y, was late without notice 5 times, caused $3,975 worth of damage to company property, had 2 customer complaints, quit with no notice, and is not eligible for rehire."

"CJ worked for us from x to y" -- no issue

"was late without notice 5 times" -- no issue as long as employer provides documentation (e.g. On 7/21/14 CJ was over 30 minutes late to an appointment, but never notified dispatch of any delay)

"caused $3,975 worth of damage to company property" -- no issue provided employer shows repair receipt and incident report establishing CJ's fault (by "preponderance of evidence" -- you could avoid that burden by stating instead "had $3,975 worth of damage done to company property assigned to her")

"had 2 customer complaints" -- no issue as long as complaints were documented and the employer had no reason to doubt their accuracy

"quit with no notice" -- no issue

"and is not eligible for rehire." -- no issue

Quite wrong. Companies are actually increasingly losing lawsuits for giving neutral referrals for bad employees (called negligent misrepresentation -- see Kadlec Medical Center v. Lakeview Medical Center & Jerner v. Allstate Insurance Co.) which is why the trend is now moving back towards more detailed, objective/documented referrals.

 

You don't think credit is a good indicator of responsibility? You don't think a company has a right to see your credit profile before assigning you $200,000 in equipment and trusting you with $1,000,000 in cargo?

More than half of the complaints posted on this forum are caused (or severely aggravated) by the driver's own financial situation. Went to CRE because they were broke and couldn't afford school. Didn't thoroughly research their next company because they quit cre in a huff and had no savings so they needed a new job now. Quit an otherwise good job because of a temporary 3 week slow period and started falling behind on bills. Signed a draconian lease purchase because they wanted to be an o/o but didn't want to wait until they had the savings to afford it.

Credit profiles say a lot about how responsible, conscientious, & forward thinking someone is.

 

Bad employees? Really, Bright One?

Do you think for 2 seconds that CJ is that 'bad employee' who needs to be retaliated against or that her last employer's failure to warn her future employer that she was late (not that she was) is ACTIONABLE?

Judges are pretty good at reading between the lines. An employer that goes out of its way to dirty up someone who has left them has intended to cause harm. That's actionable.

Cha-ching. Now, it may be cha-ching for some attorneys on both sides if serious enough. Most likely, the offending employer settles after some routine Discovery... never sees a trial.

As for your case, behind the scenes of appellate cases is that they go back to the trial judge who's now madder than Hell that you got him overturned and he'll find SOME way to rule against you. The general public thinks because you won in the appellate courts that you proceed to win in the lower court.

Not!! Those cases typically go back to the same judge, the 'trier of fact' and the litigant who won the appeal just gets hosed all over again.

This time it sticks.

 

The employee pool open to outfits with 100% turnover is typically folks who want to escape from food stamps and unemployment or under-employment. And they feast on them.

Credit profiles may say a lot more about recent economic conditions, like the Great Recession that we just went through that took folks with 'gold' credit down as their home 'equity' vanished, their car got repoed and home got foreclosed. You have right now in trucking a whole strata--like yourself--who coulda, woulda, shoulda done something other than hold a steering wheel for 100 or more hours a week. But it's an avenue up and out of adversity.

Yeah, Wal-Mart accepts 1 out of how many applications?? And has to have some way to justify why Driver A was chosen over Driver B, who's atty wants to know why not hired. Most carriers are not Wal-Mart.

Fact is, outfits buy trucks and need bodies in the seats.

Trucks don't drive themselves--yet.

 

Retaliated against? Really? Since when is telling the truth retaliation? People shouldn't be shielded from the consequences of their own actions.


But you are right: it would not be actionable if a former employer failed to disclose that CJ quit without notice.


It would be actionable if they failed to disclose a former employee was often delusional and angry -- if they knew those traits may endanger people at the new job (like ramming a loaded tractor trailer into a state capitol).

 

Say, Bright One, when do you sleep? I get up to pee, check TTR and there you are, ahead of or behind me. Quite a few others, too.

Are we all connected by some big Cosmic Bladder function?

Sheesh!!


//If a 'former' employee was delusional and angry, probably a darn good idea if referred to outside help, counseling and left it at that so the employee doesn't return with a weapon--probably happens more often than company lost a tractor because it was driven up capitol steps and destroyed.

Lots of drivers are delusional and angry. Should be. They believed--were deluded by--that recruiter who told them they'd make BIG money and should be angry as Hell because they're not.

You're from the 'suck it up' school and a very good exemplar of success over adversity. It's just as possible to avoid a lot of the adversity in trucking, too.