Should I give trucking another shot?

contrary to what you say, if you actually read my posting, i said, "If the company is out of business"...etc.etc.

when a phone call IS MADE only information regarding dates OF EMPLOYMENT can be said, as per labor laws. to say MORE THAN the dates of employment, can lead to lawsuits.

on a DAC, yes things can be listed, even positive drug/alcohol test results. i had maintained to the o/p the possibility of the flatbed company being shut down, thus no more information regarding him will show up.

since he has now claimed the flatbed company IS STILL in business, if anything dispparageing about him is said, he can easily add a rebuttle to his DAC.

seeing how HireRight/DAC has recently lost a major lawsuit against them, i would imagine HireRight to have cleaned up thier ways of conducting information gathering form trucking companies. if not, then only time will tell if HireRight/DAC goes out of business as well, since the CSA scores will hold MORE WEIGHT than a stupid DAC report. Rendering a membership to DAC useless.

 

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/administration/fmcsr/fmcsrruletext.aspx?reg=391.23

 

On this point you're right, I didn't catch the "out of business" point, so I apologize for that oversight. My BAD.

Here's where you will have a problem. Unless it's in writing, and/or you are good friends with the person making the call who is willing to testify and sting that employer, you can't prove it (if you record it you're required to notify the person they are being recorded or you yourself face charges presenting that recording as evidence without a court order and it's not permissible). Worse, to cover their a, as I mentioned, listing incidents without particulars is one way to subtly hurt a persons chances without saying a word, and depending on their interpretation of an "incident" (which allows a large field of reasons) you could have enough numbers that no one will bother. Of course, this depends on whether they believe or are members of the community that uses DAC reports and reports to them, and most likely if they participate either way, they most likely use the information and understand the game. Price-fixing is illegal, but it still happens, the problem only becomes evident when it's caught.

If you're talking about the Ryals/Smith (combined) vs. HireRight Solutions, Inc, lawsuit that was settled in 2011, that only requires them to make sure their records are up to date, including expunges, etc, allows a "victim" to challenge and change a report error requiring the company to investigate challenged information, and rebates for those that paid the fee for a report that according to Fair Credit Reporting Act they were entitled to free once a year, nothing else really changed. (The lawsuit basically established that the DAC was a credit reporting agency type of report and therefor subjected to those rules also) This is something they should have been doing anyways.

If you're referring to another lawsuit of which I'm not familiar, I'd appreciate a link to it so I can check it out. As per your point of the PSP report on drivers per CSA, it will only show roadside inspection violations, which can be an indicator of the driver's ability to inspect and find violations and the severity of the type of violations they are capable of not finding.

Though it may have a derivative reference to the type of driver you are inclined to be with regard to inspections and driving of your vehicle, it won't reflect the kind of employee you are in the employer's eyes and as such I doubt you'll be seeing the PSP replacing the DAC as a corporate information gathering and dissemination tool for hiring purposes. Under CSA it will take a larger percentage of consideration, but consider that, upon hiring, your record doesn't improve or detract from their record immediately, so as I heard from a safety guy, a driver having a bad record will only make firing him for less reason easier, simply by virtue of the fact that their record pre-qualifies them for removal. No necessity for a long documentation process to remove a driver they don't want. Under that condition you only have to fail ONE inspection for any reason to find yourself on the street.

 

Thanks for that link as a reminder of the tools at a carrier's disposal. As for documenting the results they're supposed to, that's a good question on what information is deemed information isn't it?