Legally Bound By CRST

Here's the thing, also - when someone comes here and their very first and last post is a complaint about the "evil mega carriers" and their "evil ways" and how they got "screwed by the man" we know they're not sincerely trying to work through a situation that they feel they've handled properly. If Jonathan had followed proper procedures and was confident that he was completely in the right then where did he go? Why isn't he here trying to get help to work through the situation?

See, people famously like to point fingers and then run for the hills when they've screwed up or when things aren't going their way. They like to scream, "The man screwed me!" and then leave before anyone can get enough details to find out what truly happened. Why? Because once we start digging they know we're going to figure out where they went wrong and it will be revealed that in fact they didn't get screwed, they screwed it up for themselves.

Just yesterday we had an owner operator come in here saying that he was struggling to compete and in the past had to sell equipment and take all kinds of extreme measures to stay afloat. He implored other owner operators to stop taking cheap freight (undercutting him, basically) and said:

So, if you're gonna own a truck try to have integrity and principles. So long as we take bad paying loads, they will keep them, bad paying

....and then of course he disappeared and hasn't returned. But what he's saying is if a company can haul freight cheaper than he can then they're not doing business with integrity and they have poor principles. The truth is that he simply can't compete. But is he going to stand up like a man and say, "Well guys, I gave it my best shot but you're simply better at running your business than I am." Heck no. He's going to say the winners cheated, try to make them look bad, try to make himself look like the victim of unscrupulous people, and then run for the hills before we can dig into the details properly.

It's the same thing we're dealing with in this thread. Someone isn't doing well so they point fingers at everyone else and disappear before we can learn enough to get the full discussion properly in the open.

That's why it seems we take the side of the carriers when things aren't going well for people. Because for many years we've seen hundreds and hundreds of people come here with the same tactics - the ole "blame the mega-carriers and run" game.

Like Old School said, we're trying to give people an understanding of how a driver must handle his time on the road, his relationship with dispatch, and the commitments he's made to the company. Remember, Jonathan had no problem spending CRST's money when he wanted a new career. They agreed to pay for and provide him with the training he needed and then employ him afterward. In return he had to work for them for a set period of time. He understood all of this clearly and used it all to his advantage. But when it came time to fulfill his end of the contract he quit the company and tried saying CRST is evil and they're breaking Federal law. But he disappeared before we could get enough details to learn the truth.

Did he in fact follow the proper procedures for home time? Did he properly inform CRST of his commitments? He never said. Why wouldn't he tell us the procedures he followed? Why wouldn't he return to get more help working through the problem? Did complaining publicly solve anything for him?

I have done everything through the military and thought I would be covered but I still show to be under contract

When you have an eye for it, that is a very telling statement. Like Old School said, he's trying to use one contract to get out of another. He thought he could just play the military card to CRST and get out of his civilian commitments. He thought he could just come here and point fingers at the evil mega-carriers and everyone here would rally behind his cause. But unfortunately for him we wanted more details before we jumped on his bandwagon. We wanted to make sure he held up his end of the bargain and was truly in the right before we took his side.

We also know CRST isn't run by a bunch of dummies who are just going to give the Government and our military the middle finger. They know what they're doing. They've handled many thousands of drivers over a period of decades. So for that reason we're not going to assume the mega-carrier is in the wrong. We're going to dig deeper to get more facts. Well, we would dig deeper if we could but Jonathan conveniently disappeared before giving us the chance.

... was enlisted in the National Guard prior to my CDL training with them and two months in a row they violated my rights under the Uniformed Services Employment and ReEmployment Act of 1994 by refusing to allow me to leave for my monthly drill, I saved coorespondence my taking pictures of the Qualcomm in my truck ...

According to the original post... I think he has indicated that 1) he was already in the NG before he entered into the contract with CRST and 2) he communicated properly (and has documentation of that communication) re his required duty time to the NG.

If that's the case... i.e. if CRST knew he was in the NG before the contract was signed and he followed proper procedures re the scheduling of his time-off relating to his NG service... then, it seems to me, the onus may very well be on CRST to justify their position/actions a bit more precisely.

this is how I saw it, too. it seems that old school and the other moderators automatically assume a driver at odds with one of these mega trucking companies over some issue must be in the wrong. no wonder the op bailed on his thread.

Seeking the truth when using a clarifying word like "seems" is a contradiction of ideology. Facts support the truth.

Seeking the truth would include asking the OP for the whole story not just the part that is supportive of his claim. It's obvious he left some key bits out of his post. If he followed and adhered to CRST's documented policy for requesting time-off to serve then he might have a legitiment grievance. He has yet to come back to the forum supporting the truth of how he was wronged by CRST.

If the OP had truly followed the proper procedures, then CRST would truly have been in violation of the law and he would have been able to have a lawyer take care of these issues instead of complaining here.