XPO | Double standard?

shamrockhockey

TB Lurker
Credits
53
Is company policy consistent in prohibiting the use of electronic devices with respect to non-commercial vehicles? For example, salespersons and managers. My curiousity is from recently receiving a letter of instruction for not securing the trailer door properly. It was observed by a terminal manager from a nearby location. He then forwarded the pictures he took which showed only the latch and another of the trailer number. They were taken quite close and it was not evident the vehicle was on any public road. He stated in an e-mail that he observed this while driving and then took the photos. I don't expect a revocation of the letter, I'm just bothered by the way it was handled. Is this manager in violation of policy for taking photos while operating a company car while driving?
 
Is company policy consistent in prohibiting the use of electronic devices with respect to non-commercial vehicles? For example, salespersons and managers. My curiousity is from recently receiving a letter of instruction for not securing the trailer door properly. It was observed by a terminal manager from a nearby location. He then forwarded the pictures he took which showed only the latch and another of the trailer number. They were taken quite close and it was not evident the vehicle was on any public road. He stated in an e-mail that he observed this while driving and then took the photos. I don't expect a revocation of the letter, I'm just bothered by the way it was handled. Is this manager in violation of policy for taking photos while operating a company car while driving?
You make a great point IF you were both driving. Is it possible that the pictures were taken at a stoplight or stop sign?
 
Is company policy consistent in prohibiting the use of electronic devices with respect to non-commercial vehicles? For example, salespersons and managers. My curiousity is from recently receiving a letter of instruction for not securing the trailer door properly. It was observed by a terminal manager from a nearby location. He then forwarded the pictures he took which showed only the latch and another of the trailer number. They were taken quite close and it was not evident the vehicle was on any public road. He stated in an e-mail that he observed this while driving and then took the photos. I don't expect a revocation of the letter, I'm just bothered by the way it was handled. Is this manager in violation of policy for taking photos while operating a company car while driving?
I know when I worked for roadway anyone in a company vehicle (salespeople) were held to the same standard....
 
Is company policy consistent in prohibiting the use of electronic devices with respect to non-commercial vehicles? For example, salespersons and managers. My curiousity is from recently receiving a letter of instruction for not securing the trailer door properly. It was observed by a terminal manager from a nearby location. He then forwarded the pictures he took which showed only the latch and another of the trailer number. They were taken quite close and it was not evident the vehicle was on any public road. He stated in an e-mail that he observed this while driving and then took the photos. I don't expect a revocation of the letter, I'm just bothered by the way it was handled. Is this manager in violation of policy for taking photos while operating a company car while driving?
You need to remember who you work for, ofcourse there is double standards you dummy what you gonna do about it?
 
Is company policy consistent in prohibiting the use of electronic devices with respect to non-commercial vehicles? For example, salespersons and managers. My curiousity is from recently receiving a letter of instruction for not securing the trailer door properly. It was observed by a terminal manager from a nearby location. He then forwarded the pictures he took which showed only the latch and another of the trailer number. They were taken quite close and it was not evident the vehicle was on any public road. He stated in an e-mail that he observed this while driving and then took the photos. I don't expect a revocation of the letter, I'm just bothered by the way it was handled. Is this manager in violation of policy for taking photos while operating a company car while driving?

Longstanding company policy is that no personal recording devices are to be used on company property. Hmmm.
 
You make a great point IF you were both driving. Is it possible that the pictures were taken at a stoplight or stop sign?
Of course it's possible. I don't know exactly where the photos were taken. I don't know this man, never met him. But my opinion of him is he is a little whining douchebag. I would have been much more content to sign anything if for example he had confronted me personally. But being a little feckless douchebag he handled it by e-mail. Let somebody else do his dirty work.
 
Is company policy consistent in prohibiting the use of electronic devices with respect to non-commercial vehicles? For example, salespersons and managers. My curiousity is from recently receiving a letter of instruction for not securing the trailer door properly. It was observed by a terminal manager from a nearby location. He then forwarded the pictures he took which showed only the latch and another of the trailer number. They were taken quite close and it was not evident the vehicle was on any public road. He stated in an e-mail that he observed this while driving and then took the photos. I don't expect a revocation of the letter, I'm just bothered by the way it was handled. Is this manager in violation of policy for taking photos while operating a company car while driving?

From my point of view?... yes this manager was in violation. From Corporate's point of view?...no he was not in violation. Why? cause they, ( management), would argue that they are not pulling a muti- thousand pound vehicle combination down the road that is capable of wiping out many other vehicles, (those loaded w/ families) , in one fell swoop,( a catastrophic wreck). Double standard? You make the call. As far as I'm concerned, the law makers should pass legislation that would require ALL licensed drivers to be subject to no notice drug screening somehow. And if that kind of law went into effect... ALL vehicle distracted driving would surely be eliminated virtually overnight. :1036316054:
 
From my point of view?... yes this manager was in violation. From Corporate's point of view?...no he was not in violation. Why? cause they, ( management), would argue that they are not pulling a muti- thousand pound vehicle combination down the road that is capable of wiping out many other vehicles, (those loaded w/ families) , in one fell swoop,( a catastrophic wreck). Double standard? You make the call. As far as I'm concerned, the law makers should pass legislation that would require ALL licensed drivers to be subject to no notice drug screening somehow. And if that kind of law went into effect... ALL vehicle distracted driving would surely be eliminated virtually overnight. :1036316054:

Just a follow up: At least the intoxication distracted driving would be eliminated. As far as driving w/ an electronic device in one's hand...that certainly should be a violation against that manager. Why? cause this company needs to realize that managers need to lead by example, and not by adopting the attitude, "You DSR's do as we say and not as we do" approach.
 
Just a follow up: At least the intoxication distracted driving would be eliminated. As far as driving w/ an electronic device in one's hand...that certainly should be a violation against that manager. Why? cause this company needs to realize that managers need to lead by example, and not by adopting the attitude, "You DSR's do as we say and not as we do" approach.
So it's a question of ethics. Is it permissible to violate company policy for the purpose of exposing somebody else violating a company policy. For a means to and end, I suppose yes.
 
Longstanding company policy is that no personal recording devices are to be used on company property. Hmmm.

They'd get you on a technicality there Driverslo. How so you might ask? Well, they'd argue that the manager guy taking the pics was 'IN' company property ,(his company car), and not 'ON' company property, ( a service facility). Just saying.
 
So it's a question of ethics. Is it permissible to violate company policy for the purpose of exposing somebody else violating a company policy. For a means to and end, I suppose yes.

I don't know...apparently ! Seems to me according to what you posted about the incident.... he got away w/ it.
 
They'd get you on a technicality there Driverslo. How so you might ask? Well, they'd argue that the manager guy taking the pics was 'IN' company property ,(his company car), and not 'ON' company property, ( a service facility). Just saying.
How abour you lock your trailer up like your susposed to? Non issue then. Why give them ammunition to shoot you down with driver?
 
ALL licensed drivers to be subject to no notice drug screening somehow. And if that kind of law went into effect... ALL vehicle distracted driving would surely be eliminated virtually overnight. :1036316054:
Let me get this straight, you want a gestapo booted cop pulling you over to **** in bottle whenever they feel like it ? and exactly how will that stop distracted driving? How many drug tested truck drivers do you see texting, or typing on a Qualcom?
 
Let me get this straight, you want a gestapo booted cop pulling you over to **** in bottle whenever they feel like it ? and exactly how will that stop distracted driving? How many drug tested truck drivers do you see texting, or typing on a Qualcom?

Joe ...not trying to start anything here, but notice that I posted," All licensed drivers to be subject to no notice drug screening SOMEHOW." I'm at a loss as to the wherewithal on how this could be done. Maybe to your point it couldn't and you're probably right. I'm sure if the government wanted it to happen , they'd find a way . My whole point is the issue of fairness and equity. What's good for us CDL guys should be equally as good for everyone else. Is there ever going be a law that allows the DOT to pull people over randomly to pee in a bottle? No...of course not. Certain watchdog groups wouldn't stand for such government intrusion in to their private lives. Just using hyperbolic language to show the inequity of how it is in today's world.

And to your point.. you're spot on. Even if everyone was susceptible to drug screening that would result in a loss of their right to drive if they tested possitive... there'd still be distracted driving by those engaged in using their electronic devices while driving. Everybody loves to roll the dice and take chances.
 
So it's a question of ethics. Is it permissible to violate company policy for the purpose of exposing somebody else violating a company policy. For a means to and end, I suppose yes.
Two wrongs don't make a right. There were (still are?) two sets of rules when I worked at Conway...one set for punk FOS's and company 'henchmen' and another for the DSR's. I had a 'peculiar' situation happen to me one time. I saw a rather 'flashy' BMW near one of my stops one day. About an hour later saw the SAME BMW at ANOTHER one of my stops. Hmmmmm.
 
Top