I am looking for past and present drivers for Prime who have been pressured by Prime to violate a commercial vehicle safety regulation.
On August 31, 2011, the Department of Labor's Administrative Review Board issued a decision upholding, in part, an administrative law judge's decision finding that New Prime Inc. (Prime) violated the Surface Transportation Assistance Act ("STAA") by firing Cynthia Ferguson because she would not drive a commercial vehicle in violation of the FMCSA's hazardous weather rule (49 C.F.R., Sec. 392.14). The STAA prohibits a carrier from retaliating against a driver because that drive has refused to drive in violation of a commercial vehicle safety regulation, or because the driver has complained to the carrier or the government about violations of commercial vehicle safety regulations.
While the Board found affirmed the ALJ's finding that the discharge was retaliatory and awarded $50,000 in compensatory damages, the Board set aside the ALJ's award of punitive damage and sent the case back to the administrative law judge for reconsideration of the punitive damages award. In so doing, the Board stated as follows:
Any testimony or other evidence that you could provide showing that you have been pressured by Prime to drive in violation of a commercial vehicle safety regulation may assist my client, Ms. Ferguson, and me in proving that an award of substantial punitive damages may deter future violations by Prime. If you are one of those who have been pressured to break the law, please contact me. My contact information is below.
Paul O. Taylor
Truckers Justice Center
900 West 128th Street, Suite 104
Burnsville, MN 55337
Tel. No. 651-454-5800
email: paul.taylor@truckersjusticecenter.com
NOTHING IN THIS POST SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS CREATING AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
On August 31, 2011, the Department of Labor's Administrative Review Board issued a decision upholding, in part, an administrative law judge's decision finding that New Prime Inc. (Prime) violated the Surface Transportation Assistance Act ("STAA") by firing Cynthia Ferguson because she would not drive a commercial vehicle in violation of the FMCSA's hazardous weather rule (49 C.F.R., Sec. 392.14). The STAA prohibits a carrier from retaliating against a driver because that drive has refused to drive in violation of a commercial vehicle safety regulation, or because the driver has complained to the carrier or the government about violations of commercial vehicle safety regulations.
While the Board found affirmed the ALJ's finding that the discharge was retaliatory and awarded $50,000 in compensatory damages, the Board set aside the ALJ's award of punitive damage and sent the case back to the administrative law judge for reconsideration of the punitive damages award. In so doing, the Board stated as follows:
Quote:
| The ALJ found that [Jeremy] Thomas, the fleet manager violated a federal safety statute when he pressured Ferguson to drive through the Donner Pass in hazardous conditions. He found that Thomas demonstrated a total disregard not only for Ferguson and her co-driver's safety but for the safety of others on the road. Thus he concluded that this behavior was both reprehensible and inimical to the purpose of the Act. However, the ALJ did not consider whether Thomas's behavior reflected a corporate policy of STAA violations or whether punitive damages are necessary in this case to deter future violations.
*** Thus, we vacate the ALJ's award of punitive damages and remand the case for further findings on the necessity and amount of such damages under the facts of this case. In his analysis, the ALJ should include consideration of the size of the award that would adequately deter New Prime from future violations and the punitive impact of the damages on the company. |
Paul O. Taylor
Truckers Justice Center
900 West 128th Street, Suite 104
Burnsville, MN 55337
Tel. No. 651-454-5800
email: paul.taylor@truckersjusticecenter.com
NOTHING IN THIS POST SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS CREATING AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
Posts
