New branding!

[dmac1]

That's a very surprising policy change. Not many years ago contractors at my terminal were not permitted to take package handlers and put them in trucks after the sort and go and deliver. Likewise X was at the time training drivers but we had a multi route with a turnover so extreme that he kept robbing x of the temps they had trained. Finally reached the point where X told him to get his own drivers. Now with the temps being eliminated X has no reason to train anymore. I don't know what some contractors are going to do come peak. Many will no doubt be completely unprepared. If you have to train your own while other's in your terminal don't no question they will be trying to steal them because they won't spend the money,instead expecting you to bear the cost .

When you hire a driver, make them sign a legally binding agreement that they won't go to work for another contractor for at least 1 year., since you are literally in competition with every ISP a non-compete clause makes perfect sense. Figure your cost of training, and sue if they go to another contractor.

 

[bacha29]

When you hire a driver, make them sign a legally binding agreement that they won't go to work for another contractor for at least 1 year., since you are literally in competition with every ISP a non-compete clause makes perfect sense. Figure your cost of training, and sue if they go to another contractor.

That's about the only recourse available. the obvious problem is getting the guy to sign it. No question they want the training but obligate themselves to you for a year will no doubt be cause for hesitation if not refusal. That requirement will no doubt draw down the prospective pool and will shrink even further by X's requirement that the individual must meet their approval.

 

[STFXG]

A non compete won't hold up in court. They don't have any trade secrets or sensitive information. And the cost to sue an employee isn't really worth it.

 

[It will be fine]

That's a good thing.

It's not bad now that I found a good vendor for the classroom portion. A whole 11 hr online training course that I don't have to physically teach then have my managers watch them drive for a few days. It's an easy sell for a package handler making $200/week, $700 is hitting the jackpot for them.

 

[STFXG]

It's not bad now that I found a good vendor for the classroom portion. A whole 11 hr online training course that I don't have to physically teach then have my managers watch them drive for a few days. It's an easy sell for a package handler making $200/week, $700 is hitting the jackpot for them.

PM me the class info? Sounds promising.

 

[bacha29]

It's not bad now that I found a good vendor for the classroom portion. A whole 11 hr online training course that I don't have to physically teach then have my managers watch them drive for a few days. It's an easy sell for a package handler making $200/week, $700 is hitting the jackpot for them.

That's a good alternative if every other contractor would do the same thing. But if only one or two train their own the products of their effort and money will do doubt be considered fair game of any low life contractor who would not train their own and as STFG mentioned making a no compete binding will be hard especially if the low life uses the money he saved to offer a hundred a week more.

 

[Code 82 Approved]

It's not bad now that I found a good vendor for the classroom portion. A whole 11 hr online training course that I don't have to physically teach then have my managers watch them drive for a few days. It's an easy sell for a package handler making $200/week, $700 is hitting the jackpot for them.

One of my best loaders now drives. He looks pretty damn happy as a driver.

 

[dmac1]

That's about the only recourse available. the obvious problem is getting the guy to sign it. No question they want the training but obligate themselves to you for a year will no doubt be cause for hesitation if not refusal. That requirement will no doubt draw down the prospective pool and will shrink even further by X's requirement that the individual must meet their approval.

The non-compete wouldn't bind them to you, only that they couldn't work for another ISP during that time. If they have multiple job offers already, they aren't likely to work for an ISP anyway. I the ISP is committed to getting the person qualified to drive delivering for fedex, he owes you that much.

 

[Code 82 Approved]

That's a good alternative if every other contractor would do the same thing. But if only one or two train their own the products of their effort and money will do doubt be considered fair game of any low life contractor who would not train their own and as STFG mentioned making a no compete binding will be hard especially if the low life uses the money he saved to offer a hundred a week more.

Yes, I'm sure that has already happened!

 

[dmac1]

A non compete won't hold up in court. They don't have any trade secrets or sensitive information. And the cost to sue an employee isn't really worth it.

If you've spent money on his training, I think it would hold up.

 

[vantexan]

His family never owned Greyhound Bus Lines. They owned a small regional line in which Greyhound purchased a majority interest in 1931. Greyhound purchased the remaining interest of the Smith family in 1949. Greyhound may have been crap, but the Smith family's involvement was limited to a small area and ended with the death of Earl (Fred's uncle) in 1955.

Good to know, thank you. I was going on what was posted here a long time ago. Greyhound was still carp for a long time but they seem to have improved some. Can't hold a candle to numerous bus companies in Mexico and elsewhere in Latin America however.

 

[bbsam]

PM me the class info? Sounds promising.

we have guys creating their own. a lot can be found in your state's commercial driving "rules of the road " and the Safety section of MGB.

 

[It will be fine]

we have guys creating their own. a lot can be found in your state's commercial driving "rules of the road " and the Safety section of MGB.

You could make your own, but this is much easier. Set a guy up with a laptop or have them do it at home and save yourself 11 hours of classroom time.

 

[dmac1]

You could make your own, but this is much easier. Set a guy up with a laptop or have them do it at home and save yourself 11 hours of classroom time.

Make sure to train them on all the express procedures and forms too, just so they are prepared.

 

[59 Dano]

If you've spent money on his training, I think it would hold up.

It would have no effect.

 

[dmac1]

It would have no effect.

Thank you, counsel.

 

[bbsam]

You could make your own, but this is much easier. Set a guy up with a laptop or have them do it at home and save yourself 11 hours of classroom time.

Classroom time is in the jump seat gaining route knowledge, safety tips, and reviewing the previos night's reading material.

 

[Slick silver]

Every ground driver I have come in contact with has said they are paid a flat rate regardless of hours actually worked. Falsification is rampant regarding DOT hours and most don't count hours time spent in the terminal. In my opinion this would only get worse with the addition Express freight.

Yeah add in a late flight. Especially during peak or any rainy day in Memphis. I would love to see ground guys having to wait around till 9 am for freight.

 

[Slick silver]

Or better yet, freight being shuttle out to them mid afternoon. Try paying a flat rate with that. You would so many un attempted packages

 

[It will be fine]

Yeah add in a late flight. Especially during peak or any rainy day in Memphis. I would love to see ground guys having to wait around till 9 am for freight.

My current dispatch time is 10:00 by contract and we've waited that long without service disruption. The terminal is so bad most of my guys plan on leaving at 9, they don't show up until 8-8:30. That's a bad argument.