Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Truckers

Https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/01/gorsuch-arbitration-labor-new-prime-oliveira.html

Unfortunately this is a case of a disgruntled driver. The article says that, he claimed, Prime forced him to lease a truck. Prime does not force people into leasing. We never advice new drivers to lease or buy a truck. This has no bearing on company drivers. As truck drivers, we are piecemeal workers, we get paid by the mile not by the hour. This is something we have to accept. I'm very happy with the training I received and the money I make. We advocate people start in this industry through, Paid CDL Training Programs. The driver in this case went through Prime's paid training. Then he decided to lease a truck with no knowledge of the trucking industry, business ownership, or driving a truck. We have to take responsibility for our actions and decisions. There is no easy money in life. Most millionaires did not inherit or win their money. They did it through hard work, saving and having no debt.

Regardless how it happened, it is a judgement in the drivers favor.

Unfortunately this is a case of a disgruntled driver. The article says that, he claimed, Prime forced him to lease a truck. Prime does not force people into leasing. We never advice new drivers to lease or buy a truck. This has no bearing on company drivers. As truck drivers, we are piecemeal workers, we get paid by the mile not by the hour. This is something we have to accept. I'm very happy with the training I received and the money I make. We advocate people start in this industry through, Paid CDL Training Programs. The driver in this case went through Prime's paid training. Then he decided to lease a truck with no knowledge of the trucking industry, business ownership, or driving a truck. We have to take responsibility for our actions and decisions. There is no easy money in life. Most millionaires did not inherit or win their money. They did it through hard work, saving and having no debt.

Here is the link to this: Court Ruling

Seems more like a matter of not being required to use arbitration than anything else.

Even if this gives the Plaintiffs a better chance at a big settlement, it’s a class action suit and usually only the attorneys get rich off of those.

Some of these “independent contractors” are like going through trade school to be a plumber and thinking you’ll magically come out the owner of the next Roto-Rooter.

This only affects owner/lease operators and says they can't be forced into arbitration.

Apparently he would rather work for minimum wage, $8.60 per hour in Missouri, than for milage pay. I know I'm quite happy with the money I'm making now. Yes, I get paid to sit on my butt and drive. To me there is no better job.

SCOTUS Blog

This is the best source of info for Supreme Court cases and has every petition, motion, argument, and decision listed.

The basics of this case:

Prime's contract with lease ops states "This contract establishes this relationship to be one as an independent contractor in every way" and "the independent contractor agrees to arbitration in accordance with MO Arbitrary Act and/or Federal Arbitrary Act."

The driver agrees his contract states that. But then he filed some greivances in court.

Prime argued they should stick to arbitration as per the contract between driver and Prime in accordance with the Federal Arbitrary Act.

The driver claimed that the FAA has a clause exempting transporatation commerce workers regarding "contract of employment". Prime argued that pertained to company drivers aka employees, not independent contractors. The word "employment" was designated for "employees".

Gorsuch's opinion is that the term "independent contractor" is a term of today, but the law was written in 1925. He says in 1925, employment meant "work", therefore, independent contractor or not, the person doing the work is employed by the company.

The decision is that the driver can indeed file in court, despite the contract he signed agreeing to go to arbitratiion.

*****

My opinion is this is slippery slope, not a good thing. The guy signed a contract, now he doesnt have to abide by it.

Some fancy lawyering found a loop hole in a 100 year old law. A law written in 1925 trying to keep commerce moving during the Great Depression.

But in the end, the contracts stating "this is an independent contractor agreement" can be meaningless.

People file frivilous law suits constantly. Think this is a good thing? Every idiot lease op is going to file suit and waste the courts time and money as well as drain our companies in legal fees.

So lease ops get a day in court...this means our increases and bonuses could go out the window.

More background...

This driver went through Prime PSD/school program which states you must work for 1 year to be absolved of the school debt. Then he went lease and couldnt hack it, stating he was in the hole some weeks. He then became a Prime company driver and found he was doing essentially the same job.

That is when he filed suit under Federal Labor laws and Minimum Wage laws.

If he were a better businessman, i bet he wouldnt be filing. He claimed that Prime had "considerable control" over him as a lease op.

yeah....he was offered the same loads i get, but as a lease op he could reject loads. He can ask for time off up to 59 days as long as he paid the truck or was without a truck.

This whole thing makes me wonder about the PSD/schooling contracts. I dont remember how they are worded. "work for a year to pay your schooling" must be worded to cover lease ops too, but i wonder if this guy can use that to his advantage in the case.

Amazingly...what this driver is saying is that it was better for him to be a company driver than a lease op.

gee we are so smart!

I don’t like to mix-in politics here, but this unfortunately is another fine example of enabled personal entitlement and the bleeding-heart-liberal-spin that drives the mentality. (Brett please delete this if it’s too over the top). The winners here; now and in the future are the lawyers. Who doesn’t “get” that? So sick of this kind of BS.

That said; I am not advocating full absolution of the company’s pushing L/O packages. The mega-carriers practicing this model really need to take some responsibility here and do a thorough and honest job of educating the “buyer”, and focus on enabling success; vetting a potential L/O’s qualifications as opposed to appealing to their emotions by over-selling the true business opportunity and inflated compensation benefits.

At my 9 month point, Swift approached me about leasing; spoke to a salesperson. I could tell she knew I understood the “fleece-job” these deals represent and gracefully backed-down once she realized the questions I was posing could not be answered truthfully without contradicting her sales pitch.

For me it’s a violation of ethics and their propensity for taking advantage of the easy mark most newbies present.

Rainy you missed your calling, you should have been a lawyer... I will guess most lease ops have no clue what’s in their contract. Shame on them.... The stuff going on in Ca mainly pertaining to container haulers is somewhat similiar. The industry has brought some of it on themselves though.