Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Ol Swifty, they stomped on their willies again

Big Sky Redneck
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/swift-ordered-to-pay-rival-crst-more-than-15-million-in-driver-poaching-lawsuit

A federal jury ordered Swift Transportation, a unit of Knight-Swift Transportation Holdings Inc. (NYSE: KNX), to pay its trucking rival more than $15 million for allegedly poaching drivers who were under contract to CRST Expedited, which is based in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

According to court documents filed in U.S. District Court in Iowa in March 2017, CRST claims Swift purposely recruited and hired drivers who had completed CRST?s driver training program to obtain their commercial driver?s licenses (CDLs), but were still contractually obligated to work for the motor carrier for 10 months.

In the suit, CRST identified more than 250 drivers who had signed 10-month employment contracts with the carrier that were later recruited by Swift.

Starting in 2016, CRST claims it received more than 150 employment verification requests from Swift, headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona, for drivers who were still under contract to work for CRST.

Court documents allege that each time CRST received an employment verification for one of its drivers still under contract, it sent correspondence to Swift, ?notifying it of the driver?s contractual commitment to CRST.?

The jury found that Swift intentionally and improperly interfered with CRST drivers? contracts, awarding it $3 million, $5 million in punitive damages and $7.5 million for unjust enrichment.
0

Comments

13 comments

Date Votes
  • cbxjeff
    Wow. This will sure eat into their at fault accident fund. :lol:
    0
  • neacpa
    Sue the drivers - they are the ones with the contract, not Swift.

    Is the courts going to start issuing judgments against head-hunters whose job is find employees for their business clients?

    My son is an accounting supervisor with a nationwide company based in Dallas. He gets emails and phone calls from head-hunters all the time.
    0
  • Junkballer
    neacpa wrote:
    Sue the drivers - they are the ones with the contract, not Swift.


    Agree with you on this one 100% ;). You can bet the ruling will be appealed and won.....as it should be.
    0
  • Toolman286
    SWIFT = Single White Interbred Female Truckers
    0
  • yoshmyster
    I don't know. I wonder how many jumped ship had an accident right after working for swift? Maybe swift did them a favor? And now there's a payday? CRST done made out like they hit the lotto.
    0
  • spasmcreek
    no way defending swift ..but...drivers took an offer ??????? ...but....gotta sue where the money is.....some juries can be stupid
    0
  • Junkballer
    The 250+ drivers weren't forced to leave CRST, they left for a reason, more likely over promises not kept by CRST which they felt voided their contracts. It makes one wonder how many left for other companies other than Swift.
    0
  • hillbille
    agree with the others, it is drivers responsibility, as they signed contract, unless swift offered to buy out remainder of contract and never did............ just another example of blame the company and let individual not be responsible for their own actions
    0
  • toad67
    I heard that a couple of them got into a fight over who had the better looking truck....
    0
  • Sam06
    I cannot understand how the Company(Swift) can be held responsible it should be on the individuals who broke their contracts.
    0
  • mag00
    The getaway driver is part of the bank robbery.

    Swift intentionally poached even after they were warned about contracts, that is "torturous interference of a business".
    0
  • TRAP55
    I have no sympathy for either company, both should be sued into bankruptcy for the contract scams they run on drivers.
    While those drivers are being "trained" by CRST, CRST is getting a fat check ($5K) from uncle sam. The drivers contract is usually a sign on bonus, $2-$2.5K, that you don't get until you've done your 10 months. In that time, the driver is getting cut rate pay, crap loads, etc. Swift comes along, offers to buy out the contract, makes the driver an offer that's "almost" to good to be true, and he bails out to Swift. CRST doesn't have to pay the bonus, gets a bunch of cut rate miles, gets to keep all of uncle sam's check, and recruits another clueless truck driving school graduate. But it doesn't end there.
    Swift makes the recruit an offer to buy a truck from them driving under their name. It starts out with good money making loads, until Swift gets the money they need from the driver. Then the loads get crappy, then few and far between. If you're not rolling, you're not making money. Then the driver is broke, so they repo the truck, and put the next sucker into it thinking he's making money and buying a truck.
    "Training" consists of riding with a trainer, while he gets paid for the miles you drive. You get the equivalent of an unemployment check for this time. This is why you have a bunch of young truck drivers, that can't drive, and high balling down the roads trying to make enough money to feed themselves. The DOT keeps adding regulations on the drivers to protect the public, but nobody is regulating the companies that put these road hazards out in 40 tons of potential disaster. It's criminal, and they should be prosecuted under the RICO Act. It's disgusting what has happened to the industry.
    0
  • allen griggs
    Pay them money? CRST should be grateful. They hijacked their dumbest drivers. You have to be a registered dumb ass to work for Swift in the first place.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity