What's new

Holland | Driver fired in A-town

2631 said:
It is my understanding that the Teamsters union contract does not recognize the 16 hr. exemption for city drivers... I would have done the same thing, pulled over & waited for a relief driver. I'm sure Jack H. will agree, safety first!!!
Click to expand...
In a letter dated 20 Feb. 2004 to TMI Chairman Jim Roberts, Tyson Johnson, Co-Chairman of TNFINC (Teamsters National Freight Industry Negotiating Committee) states:
4. TNFINC rejected TMI's proposal to make the 16 hour rule applicable to both city and over-the-road drivers. However, as in item No.1 above, TNFINC indicated that the employers should identify any specific runs for TNFINC's consideration for the applicability of the 16 hour rule...

Now I seriously doubt if this situation was submitted to TNFINC for their consideration and I know of nowhere in the nation where any special consideration has been sought by or given to any company.

rrider1971, Your BA should have a copy of this letter. I seen your post just ahead of 2631's post that I responded to here. The TM attempting to force that driver into the 16 hour rule is wrong. The driver in question should have no trouble getting back to work, receiving any lost time wages and having any record of this expunged from his personnel record...
 
2631 said:
It is my understanding that the Teamsters union contract does not recognize the 16 hr. exemption for city drivers... I would have done the same thing, pulled over & waited for a relief driver. I'm sure Jack H. will agree, safety first!!!
Click to expand...
In a letter dated 20 Feb. 2004 to TMI Chairman Jim Roberts, Tyson Johnson, Co-Chairman of TNFINC (Teamsters National Freight Industry Negotiating Committee) states:
4. TNFINC rejected TMI's proposal to make the 16 hour rule applicable to both city and over-the-road drivers. However, as in item No.1 above, TNFINC indicated that the employers should identify any specific runs for TNFINC's consideration for the applicability of the 16 hour rule...

Now I seriously doubt if this situation was submitted to TNFINC for their consideration and I know of nowhere in the nation where any special consideration has been sought by or given to any company.

rrider1971, Your BA should have a copy of this letter. I seen your post just ahead of 2631's post that I responded to here. The TM attempting to force that driver into the 16 hour rule is wrong. The driver in question should have no trouble getting back to work, receiving any lost time wages and having any record of this expunged from his personnel record...
 
i recieved a letter for going over 14 hours i brokedown and it took them 5 hours to get my tire changed . i thouht that i was doing the right thing now i will never do it again .
 
i recieved a letter for going over 14 hours i brokedown and it took them 5 hours to get my tire changed . i thouht that i was doing the right thing now i will never do it again .
 
rrider1971,
I went back and retrieved this from an earlier post I made concerning the 34 hour restart. This is an outline of the correspondence between TMI and TNFINC when the new HOS went into effect...

Letter dated Feb. 20, 2004 from TNFINC (Teamsters National Freight Industry Negotiating Committee) co chair, Tyson Johnson to TMI chief negotiator Jim Roberts that outlines TNFINC's stand on any rule changing proposals that were submitted by TMI because of the new hrs. of service rule...
TMI submitted 5 rule proposals to TNFINC on 2-17-04. In these proposals, TMI requested:
(1) Implementation of the 34 hr. restart.
(2) For drivers to be called on the 8th hour of their 10 hour rest, for dispatch.
(3) For carriers, who elect, to convert any city/linehaul operations from 7 day/60 hour operation to 8 day/70 hour operation.
(4) Use of the 16 hour rule for city/linehaul.
(5) The right to negotiate with respective supplemental committees over any additional regional changes that may come later.


TNFINC responded on 2-20-04:
(1) No. But TNFINC states, if the Employers have runs that concievably could be run 3 times per week under the new regs, such runs should be identified and presented to TNFINC for consideration. Additionally, TNFINC stated that there would be NO 34 hr. restart for "extra board" drivers, because such a restart would eliminate jobs.
(2) Yes, Employers could call drivers at a "lay point" on not less than 8 hours for dispatch provided that they wouldn't be dispatched before the 10th hour and provided that it didn't violate any local work rules.
(3) Employers could only elect to convert their city operation from 7-60 to 8-70 if the employer had written agreement with the Local Union prior to Jan. 1, 2003.
(4) Because of the denial of request #1, the 16 hour rule was rejected however, as noted in item #1, TNFINC indicated that the employers should identify any specific runs for TNFINC's consideration.
(5) TNFINC informed TMI that all hrs. of service negotiations should be conducted at the TNFINC level and NOT with supplemental negotiating committees...
 
rrider1971,
I went back and retrieved this from an earlier post I made concerning the 34 hour restart. This is an outline of the correspondence between TMI and TNFINC when the new HOS went into effect...

Letter dated Feb. 20, 2004 from TNFINC (Teamsters National Freight Industry Negotiating Committee) co chair, Tyson Johnson to TMI chief negotiator Jim Roberts that outlines TNFINC's stand on any rule changing proposals that were submitted by TMI because of the new hrs. of service rule...
TMI submitted 5 rule proposals to TNFINC on 2-17-04. In these proposals, TMI requested:
(1) Implementation of the 34 hr. restart.
(2) For drivers to be called on the 8th hour of their 10 hour rest, for dispatch.
(3) For carriers, who elect, to convert any city/linehaul operations from 7 day/60 hour operation to 8 day/70 hour operation.
(4) Use of the 16 hour rule for city/linehaul.
(5) The right to negotiate with respective supplemental committees over any additional regional changes that may come later.


TNFINC responded on 2-20-04:
(1) No. But TNFINC states, if the Employers have runs that concievably could be run 3 times per week under the new regs, such runs should be identified and presented to TNFINC for consideration. Additionally, TNFINC stated that there would be NO 34 hr. restart for "extra board" drivers, because such a restart would eliminate jobs.
(2) Yes, Employers could call drivers at a "lay point" on not less than 8 hours for dispatch provided that they wouldn't be dispatched before the 10th hour and provided that it didn't violate any local work rules.
(3) Employers could only elect to convert their city operation from 7-60 to 8-70 if the employer had written agreement with the Local Union prior to Jan. 1, 2003.
(4) Because of the denial of request #1, the 16 hour rule was rejected however, as noted in item #1, TNFINC indicated that the employers should identify any specific runs for TNFINC's consideration.
(5) TNFINC informed TMI that all hrs. of service negotiations should be conducted at the TNFINC level and NOT with supplemental negotiating committees...
 
tnt516 said:
i recieved a letter for going over 14 hours i brokedown and it took them 5 hours to get my tire changed . i thouht that i was doing the right thing now i will never do it again .
Click to expand...


We recently had a driver receive a "Warning Letter" for going over his 60 hrs driving by 4 mins.....Yes you read it right 4 minutes. He also thought that he was doing the right thing.
 
tnt516 said:
i recieved a letter for going over 14 hours i brokedown and it took them 5 hours to get my tire changed . i thouht that i was doing the right thing now i will never do it again .
Click to expand...


We recently had a driver receive a "Warning Letter" for going over his 60 hrs driving by 4 mins.....Yes you read it right 4 minutes. He also thought that he was doing the right thing.
 
If anything the driver should have been rewarded for obeying the law! :1036316054:
 
If anything the driver should have been rewarded for obeying the law! :1036316054:
 
Well Brothers here is what happened. My firing got reduced to a 1 day suspension. :tongue0002:Jack H, was present, and he said I should have driven anyway. And greived it after the fect! That said, he's our "Labor Man", now I'm sure the "Safety" dept. was consulted before our meeting, to make sure they could fire, and make it stick. Or were they? That also makes me think that USF Ho. "Safety" is only more of a smoke-screen to divert even more liablity to the drivers, because the company holds "safety/training" sessions.:hysterical: But this matter is still not resolved the Union and the comp. are going to have to file a joint letter to the D.O.T. to get clarification of the law in this case. Thus making a greivance not warrented. (due to the fact Panel CAN NOT interpret the Law.)
 
Well Brothers here is what happened. My firing got reduced to a 1 day suspension. :tongue0002:Jack H, was present, and he said I should have driven anyway. And greived it after the fect! That said, he's our "Labor Man", now I'm sure the "Safety" dept. was consulted before our meeting, to make sure they could fire, and make it stick. Or were they? That also makes me think that USF Ho. "Safety" is only more of a smoke-screen to divert even more liablity to the drivers, because the company holds "safety/training" sessions.:hysterical: But this matter is still not resolved the Union and the comp. are going to have to file a joint letter to the D.O.T. to get clarification of the law in this case. Thus making a greivance not warrented. (due to the fact Panel CAN NOT interpret the Law.)
 
There is another rule invovled w/ this, that made it possible that they could have upheld the firing. That was pointed out by Danny V. in E.R. Don't want to post here(never know who's sand-bagging) but I see many Holland road-drivers come thru A-town term would be more than willing to share the info w/ you. I'm Scott K. Just ask, I'll also share it with our road -drivers from A-town and have them relay the info
 
There is another rule invovled w/ this, that made it possible that they could have upheld the firing. That was pointed out by Danny V. in E.R. Don't want to post here(never know who's sand-bagging) but I see many Holland road-drivers come thru A-town term would be more than willing to share the info w/ you. I'm Scott K. Just ask, I'll also share it with our road -drivers from A-town and have them relay the info
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top