swift and the lease purchase

i spent a month running at 63, 65 and 68, under different loads, different elevation changes...and seems my 'sweet spot' is when the truck is running at 1450-1500. Normally this means i'm running about 65-68. but then again, i have my cruise on most of the time i'm running in the midwest with little elevation changes. i'm averaging $1.61 out of pocket for fuel...least thats what they tell me over that message on the qualcomm. but if i'm running a bit tight on time....i'm keeping the hammer down and get here as fast as i can.

as far as the OPs question...i'm averaging 2800-3000/wk. I dont have a maintenance account. Every dime my truck earns (aside from an account i set aside for self-employment taxes) goes into the same account, and i live off an allowance. I always keep in mind how many miles i run that week, and 'ballpark' how much i'd have set aside for maint. account. And i know i'll catch flack for that from all the "parents" out there who just cant resist telling me what i'm doing wrong. But the way i figure it.....the R/Os are coming out of my settlement either way you look at it. might as well just take it out directly from the settlement rather than saying its coming out of the 'maintenance account'. and if i have a bad week (like the week i broke down and lost 1600 mi i had stacked up for that weekend) i'm just very careful on my allowance. Now once i get a fridge put in the truck, i can ratchet down my food expense a little more.

 

actually, you're incorrect. I first saw the copy of a lease earlier this year when i was considering getting into a new truck with their "8 week deferrment" deal. (then to find out in the small print, that they were actually charging you a 'service fee' for deferrment of the down payment for said 8 weeks). I got a copy of the lease the day before i signed it, and looked it all over again, and 95% of it was the exact same one i saw earlier in the year. and any questions i had with the lease or its wording, i either called swift and/or called my lawyer to have it explained in dumb truck driver terms.

 

Like I said, it was this way when my hubby signed his contract in 2005 and maybe things have changed since then. It would be understandable that they would change the conditions of the lease contract considering Swift has a class action lawsuit against them about the very one-sidedness in the contract.

So what did your lawyer tell you about the contract?

If I may be so bold, what were your questions about the contract to Swift and your lawyer?

 

well the class action suit is basicly over the lease/ops being called 'independant contractors', but can only pull swift freight, etc., AND that basicly being a company employee driving a lease truck, the company should pay for the bennys.

but i think it gets thrown out, because half of the drivers just want a lease truck for reasons based on pride and ego. to be able to 'show up' friends of theirs that are still co. drivers. then there are others who want to have their own business, etc.

 

I'd heard there's some irregularities in the way Swift rates and pays for miles vs dispatch directions, that end up with the contractor on the loosing side of the deal.

 

I believe the current lawsuit is company drivers wanting Movers' Miles changed over to Practical Miles. They are trying to change an established industry-wide practice that, while not entirely fair, allows them to run out of route occasionally for Walmart and to reach a truck stop. There will be a trade off if they win.

There was a lawsuit settled a couple of years ago that involved Independent Contractors wherein the contractors wanted benefits paid for. The judge said that since Swift offered company medical benefits to the contractors,the contractors were, in effect, company employees. Swift ended up paying out a few million bucks and then immediately cancelled all company sponsored medical benefits to contractors. The tradeoff was now I have to buy my insurance on the open market rather than enjoy the hugely discounted group rates formerly offered by Swift. And, since that piece of dreck passed and was signed into law last year, I'm finding pemiums have already gone up with predictions of rates tripling over the next few years.

 

I'd heard some things about it via a couple of the Roaddog shows - Evan Lockridge interviewed the plaintiffs attorney. As I recall there was something about HHG vs practical, and it had been certified as a class-action that included independent contractors as well - could be wrong, I wasn't entirely paying attention.

But yeah, getting practical miles isn't all its cracked-up to be. Those trips to WalMart become "out-of-route" miles very quickly I understand.

 

Most companies who pay practical miles turn around and charge the driver for out-of-route miles. Always a tradeoff.

 

I think if I were still company, I'd much rather have the freedom to run out of route without being charged for it than the 10% or so difference practical miles make. That out of route stuff can end up being one of the many things a lousy carrier might tend to hold against a driver.

 

Well, let's think about that: you are the carrier and have been ordered by a court to pay practial (or hub) miles. You have drivers who follow your routing to the letter, but one guy who is costing you hard money with his trips to Walmart, stops at the house and "shortcuts" even though you have made it clear that this is no .onger acceptable. Yet, he continues to cost you in fuel and maintenance. And then he expects to be paid his hub miles.

You're the "lousy" carrier. What are you going to do with this guy? Everybody else is doing what you ask and remaining on route with maybe a few extra miles. This guy is cutting directly from your bottom line.

Me? I'd be holding it against him. I'm not in business to mollycoddle prima dona drivers. I'm in business to make money.