2, Report #1460457. Swift, Schneider, Werner, etc., deserve what they get, they treat there employees like modern day slavery, they created this mess with deregulation and made being a truck driver was something anyone can do. Slow trucks with sensors that are tuned up to very sensitive " saftey issues". While GSD does not expect a quick settlement, we are confident of our chances of ultimate success in this case. On January 22nd,the Court denied Swifts motionagain deciding that a trial on the issue of whether the drivers are employees is required by the Ninth Circuit and that the trial would consider evidence of Swifts practices outside those identified in the contract and lease themselves. (ltr to Berman stamped 3.24.10.pdf 2MB), Posted on Wednesday, March 24 2010 at 4:14pm, Defendants have requested Judge Berman to give them permission to make a motion to dismiss the case in favor of arbitration. They will put you into debt while you are working like a slave. This letter should state that you dispute the debt claim and request verification of the claim. Click here to review the Parrish affidavit. We believe the contract is unlawful, deceptive, and coercive, and we are asking that the Court grant a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction:(1) enjoining 16 and 17E of the new Agreement; (2) requiring Defendants to inform all lease operators including those who have already signed the Agreement that paragraphs 16 and 17E have been enjoined and are no longer operative; (3) enjoining Defendants and their counsel from engaging in any further contacts with current opt-ins and putative class members regarding the matters raised in this suit, including communications that request or require LOs to enter into agreements that may in any way impact the liability or damages issues that are currently pending before this court, without first informing Plaintiffs counsel and obtaining permission from the Court. If the 9th Circuit reverses Judge Sedwicks order sending the case to arbitration, a hearing will be held in the District Court to decide if the trucker plaintiffs in this case were treated as employees by Swift. Furthermore, in accordance with the Courts order compelling arbitration, on October 8, 2010, Plaintiffs have filed a demand for arbitration with the AAA on behalf of all Plaintiffs, including those who have already joined the case. You know what this means?! Posted on Thursday, March 11 2010 at 10:01am. Click here to read the brief in support of Plaintiffs PI motion. document.getElementById( "ak_js_1" ).setAttribute( "value", ( new Date() ).getTime() ); Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com. What goes around comes around and God does not like ugly. Drivers had argued, successfully, that because this case has been slowed down, hindered, and repeatedly delayed for years by the Defendant, the information in Swifts records would not be current or useful if, or when, a Collective Action is certified and Plaintiffs asked for the records so that we could begin the process of ensuring that the contact information in those records is up-to-date and accurate in order to send notice to a group of over 16,000 drivers who may be eligible to join this case, if and when that should occur. Under the law of contract, plaintiffs seek to declare the contracts void or voidable for unconscionability. Then do a check on their Swift lawsuit update. On July 25th, Plaintiffs filed a reply brief in support of their motion to lift the stay for arbitration. Along with this removal of the remedy of going to court, is the fact that class action waivers clauses that companies write into the form agreements they have customers or employees sign which prohibit claims being brought as class actions, have frequently been held to be valid. As long as we stay as individual drivers concerned abou ourselves we will continue to see this industry go down the tubes. Swift has now filed its appeal brief with the Ninth Circuit. This means that, in most cases, truckers will not be forced into mandatory arbitration and cannot waive their rights to participate in class actions. Warren transport would not let you take a load that didnt come from their dispatch. But unlike his competitors, he doesnt have his nuts in one basket. On August 6, 2013, Swift Transportation Company acquired Central Refrigerated Transportation, Inc. in a transaction valued at $225 million. Swift is now attempting to extract the stay they were denied by refusing to cooperate with the discovery process, requiring the Motion for Sanctions. Please select the number of verifiable months youve been driving professionally using your Class A CDL within the last 3 years. Click here to read the Plaintiffs motion papers. Swift along with many other these major trucking companies short many drivers on pay they work for. Plaintiffs request to enjoin Defendants from engaging in future contact with putative class members regarding matters in this suit is denied as unnecessarily restrictive., IMPORTANT NOTICE TO ALL SWIFT CONTRACTORS REGARDING THE NEW ICOA. Yet I would bet that this fat cat just like trumpet pays zero taxes. AVAYA HOLDINGS CORP. (NYSE: AVYA) SHAREHOLDER CLASS ACTION ALERT: Bernstein Liebhard LLP Reminds Investors of the Deadline to File a Lead Plaintiff Motion in a Securities Class Action . Posted on Tuesday, June 29 2010 at 11:33am, Plaintiffs have renewed their motion for a preliminary injunction in this case. As this case moves toward its inevitable conclusion, Swift continues to make numerous efforts to delay the day of decision. Merger or Take Over? Repair and tire replacement reserve of 1 cent per authorized dispatch mile (unused portion refunded at the end of the lease purchase agreement) 7. When you receive your notice, please read it carefullyit includes important details about the case and the settlement, including your options and the deadlines to exercise those options. We opposed Swifts application for a stay and asked the Court to sanction Swift for a frivolous motion. The courts video feed of the argument is available here. 01:05 PM. If you are already a plaintiff in this case, you may call us if you wish us to send the letter on your behalf. (LogOut/ Plaintiffs are very happy that the Court has agreed to hear our appeal, as an earlier panel of the 9th Circuit has already ruled that the decision to send this case to arbitration to decide if the drivers were legally deemed independent contractors was in error. Posted on Monday, August 2 2010 at 4:32pm. No driver would go outside the company for a load for fear of severe backlash and devastating financial consequences. Click here for decision. Every one of themLIECheetAnd STEEL.in my experance not one trucking Co, big or small can be trusted.and brokers are among the worst theivesthey should ALL be auitedand then be made to pay the drivers back twice what they skim plus interestthen be black ballednever able to work in any type of trucking feild again..no better yet..make them drive under the same condistions they put on us.for a minimum of 5 yrs. If class certification is granted, notice will issue to all drivers who may have eligible claims. The stipulation was so ordered by the Court. Also, on the plus side for Plaintiffs, arbitration is a much more streamlined process and Swift is unlikely to be able to tie up the litigation for long periods of discovery in which they would be able to depose and question truckers for months or years before trial. Now well find out how to go from here to a final resolution.. The months where I was on the road actually working, The miles they pay me doesnt match the miles I drove. 14 business days after the effective date, Thursday, March 26th, is the deadline for defendants to fund the Qualified Settlement Fund (QSF) (essentially, an escrow account controlled by the claims administrator). That works out to just shy of $17,000 per driver. Mega-carrier Swift Transportation has just lost a pivotal court decision in a lawsuit brought against it by five former owner-operators at the company over their employment classification. The case cannot move forward until the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals determines whether District Judge Sedwick erred by sending this case to arbitration without deciding first whether the Plaintiffs are exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act. December 01, 2021 12:45 PM. The decision could possibly have huge ramifications for up to 15,000 former Swift drivers, and even owner-operators with other companies. Click here to read the Court of Appeals ruling. After trip, drivers do not get wat is left of that fuel $$, paid to them. Click here to read a copy of the petition for mandamus. Plaintiffs filed their Opposition to Defendants Motion to Compel Arbitration of the claims in this case. Loaner truck program based on availability 4. Click here to download a sample letter form to a debt collector, Swift or IEL. Parties Met for Mediation, Waiting on Hearing Date Posted November 16, 2017. Judge Sedwicks chambers would not address that request unless defendants make it in motion form, which is expected shortly. We are on the same page when it comes to Monthly Six figure golden parachutes for PT work. A jury has ruled in favor of pop superstar Taylor Swift in a high-profile case in Denver. We will be in touch with affected clients individually following additional discussion with the lawyers for the parties in the Montalvo case and/or after the final settlement fairness hearing with the court on October 30, 2015. According to court documents, Swift Transportation is agreeing to pay $7.25 million. Due to the size of the class, it may take some time for class members to receive their notices. A brief initial conference was held by U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman in this case. Maybe Im wrong I have a truck signed on with Mercer transportation by the time you finish renting a trailer waiting for loads there is no money to be made. After all of the briefing is complete (by September 16, 2016), the Court will rule on the misclassification issue. Swift filed itsresponse. Money 8:14 am. The Ninth Circuits ruling was a critical decision in favor of the drivers, since it meant that the District Court must decide whether the ICOA/Lease constitute a contract of employment, and if the Court found the contract to be one of employment then the case would never go to arbitration. The court has asked Plaintiffs to respond no later than February 10, 2017. Plaintiffs have asked the 9th Circuit to permit an appeal of Judge Sedwicks decision to send the case to arbitration. Cause they use hhg and not practical/actual miles. Recognizing that the 9th Circuits opinion suggests that a District Judge and not an arbitrator must determine if the drivers in this case are employees, but disagreeing with that finding, Judge Sedwick has certified an appeal to the 9th Circuit on the question of whether the case can be sent to an arbitrator.