R&L | Judge finds R&L carriers wrongfully fired driver for refusing to drive in bad weather

rodedawg

Dockworker with a CDL
PREMIUM
Credits
395
truckersjusticeproject
truckersjusticeproject is offline Junior Member

Join Date
Aug 2010
Posts
8

Judge Finds R&L Carriers Wrongfully Fired Driver for Refusing to Drive in Bad Weather

In a decision issued on November 20, 2011, a Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge vindicated truck driver Rob Fink’s decision to refuse to pull a double trailer set from Hagerstown, Maryland to Norristown, Pennsylvania due to hazardous weather conditions. Fink’s attorney, Paul Taylor of the Truckers Justice Center, filed a claim for Fink with the Department of Labor under the Surface Transportation Assistance Act which protects commercial drivers from retaliation for refusing to operate a commercial vehicle in violation of a safety law or regulation, or for refusing to drive based upon a reasonable safety concern.

On the afternoon of January 11, 2011 Mr. Fink observed heavy blowing snow near his home. Weather reports sources forecasted heavy, blowing snow, icy road surfaces, with wind gusts up to 30 miles per hour along his scheduled route of travel. When Mr. Fink drove his four-wheel drive vehicle a short distance that afternoon the roads were slippery, with heavy winds and snow. When he returned home from the store he continued to monitor weather reports which called for conditions to worsen overnight. Reports advised drivers to stay off the roads that evening.

Mr. Fink was fired after he told his supervisors that he would not be taking his assigned run that evening due to hazardous driving conditions. Due to the loss of his job Mr. Fink and his family experienced financial difficulties resulting in the loss of his home

Labor Department Judge Linda Chapman found that R&L unlawfully retaliated against Mr. Fink by firing for his refusal to drive due to reasonable concerns over safety stating that “the right of the Respondent [R&L Carriers] to conduct its business over the interstate highways, must be balanced against the safety of its employees, and the public that travels on those interstate highways. That is precisely why the Act permits a driver who has a reasonable concern that weather conditions are too hazardous to take a truck on the highways to refuse to do so, without fear of reprisal.”

Judge Chapman ordered R&L to reinstate Mr. Fink as a driver, to pay him in excess of $30,000 in back wages, his attorney fees and $100,000 for the mental pain and emotional distress. Fink’s attorney, Paul Taylor, indicated that this is the largest award ever for mental pain and emotional distress under the Surface Transportation Assistant Act.

Judge Chapman also ordered R&L to pay fink punitive damages in the amount of $50,000 stating that R&L’s “conduct reflects a degree of conscious disregard for how its practices obstruct Congress’s mandate in the Surface Transportation Assistance Act, and that punitive damages are appropriate to correct and deter this conduct.”

Mr. Fink’s attorney, Paul Taylor, may be reached by calling the Truckers Justice Center at 651-454-5800

Here is a link to the decision in Fink v. R & L Carriers Shared Service:
http://www.oalj.dol.gov/Decisions/AL...5_CADEC_SD.PDF

There ya go Richard Herbert
 
R&L Carriers has complete disregard for its employees and their safety...This driver did the right the thing, and it is very unfortunate that he lost his home because of it....Damned if you do, and damned if you don't...Fortunately, Mr. Fink will receive damages from R&L..

I am very glad that R&L was held responsible, and the judge found CORRECTLY that R&L unlawfully retaliated against this driver... More drivers need to stand up against R&L and Zimmerman...

I will be totally surprised if R&L stays in business very much longer, they are a completely different company, than they were 4-5 years ago....

Way to go Mr. Fink, I admire you for what you did, you did the right thing, standing up to these incompetent fools...
 
for years , R&L was a good company to work for EXCEPT in the winter. nothing like being up north, and having a roberts in lakeland, fl., tell you the roads arent bad, go. the company has always thought in the winter, you did not work there, they owned you to do with as they please. truck drivers are not idiots. they know when to go, and when to not go..that is another reason we retired, because the company had so little regard for the driver, and the law.
 
for years , R&L was a good company to work for EXCEPT in the winter. nothing like being up north, and having a roberts in lakeland, fl., tell you the roads arent bad, go. the company has always thought in the winter, you did not work there, they owned you to do with as they please. truck drivers are not idiots. they know when to go, and when to not go..that is another reason we retired, because the company had so little regard for the driver, and the law.

Unfortunately that hasn't changed much. Here in Ct we have a new law in place that requires all employers with over 50 employees to pay 1 hour of sick time for every 40 hours worked topping out at 6 days. There are no restrictions on who is able to get this but R+L has decided that they don't have to. We also are suppose to get the first 5 days payed for jury duty ,that is also a law in Ct yet they believe they don't have to pay it even though our own company employee handbook says that in regards to jury duty pay ,R+L will follow any state laws. It really is one of the things that bugs me about this place,they seem to make up their own rules as they go along and sometimes make rules that completely supersede their own rules. Ive tried to explain these laws to them but they don't seem to want to know or refuse to believe it as if the fact is if we don't believe it then we don't have to do it kind of mentality.
 
Another example of a typical non-union company screwjob, just like that guy in VA they canned for supposedly stealing computers when he didn't steal anything.
 
good job finks the only way of no going out in bad weather is call out sick once u swipe that timecard your ass is belongs to the company they sit in that office and have a clue what goes on once u hit the road were a nonunion shop as drivers we need to act as one
 
I think that cost them 3 or 4 mil also.

You know, in Britain under the legal system they have, the loser pays when it comes to frivolous lawsuits, so that crap don't happen on their side of the pond like it does here.

A company should operate the same way. If you're management and you fire a guy, and it winds up costing the company money like it did in those two cases, YOU are the one shown the door. That would pretty much eliminate the screw jobs, personal vendettas, and politics that plague non-union companies for no other reason than they know they can get away with it.
 
Top