Actually, a company is not under any type of legal law to NOT give out employment history information. They cannot legally slander a driver, but they can indicate work history including abandonment, accidents, late loads, misuse of company fund, policy violations, satisfactory, outstanding, etc. etc. That work history typically mirrors DAC selections.

Most companies offer up the work history; some will not. In the end, it's the companies choice whether they offer the work history to a requesting company.

What a company MUST offer is dates of employment and D&A information, providing the asking company has provided a signed release from the driver indicating they are allowed to release that info. That is the only info regulated by law.

 

And by the way, Stevens would have absolutely hit him with an abandonment if he left it at a truck stop.

 

And I am just wondering what part of it does not matter if he applies to a DAC using company or not. The company he is applying to still must verify employment information and when they call Stevens you can bet that Stevens will pass on the abandonment. :roll: :roll:

 

Yep thats possible

 

maybe your brother could take him under his wing, he must need some help at that retirement village

 

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

True, Fredog!!

:shock:
But do you really think that a security guard who abandoned his truck can be trusted with a notepad or a pen??

 

I wouldnt give them to him right away, let him prove himself first

 

Previous employers CANNOT offer more information than what is requested. They also cannot give the reasoning for a firing. All they can say is "will not rehire"
If they give a reasoning for hire, its easy to cross that slippery slope into slander and if its just some HR dept that the prospective employer is calling, saying "joe blow was fired for abandonment" is actually a matter of opinion.

 

he left the truck at a truck stop and found a way home, we had to incur the cost of recovering the truck, we terminated him for abandoning the truck, but hey, that's just our opinion..

 

And if the employer tells the truth....I guess they have to worry about telling the truth??

Slander....uh, no. Documentation provides otherwise. If someone who wants to allege "slander" and sue based on that allegation, it is a very difficult case to win, and the slope is even slipperier for the so called victim, particularly if they are falsely accusing another party of slandering them.

It all comes out in depositions......

BTW, there is far more than can be said than that required to be unsaid. Besides.....if I ever "terminated" and employee.... I gave them an employment endorsement that made them sound like "superman, and all the rest of the super heroes combined".... the caller got the point. Yet not once did I EVER say a single improper, slanderous or malicious word.

I just did my civic duty.