Obama Administration sues truck company for firing alcoholic driver

Actually, Mr. High and Mighty, you should be ashamed of that avatar.

 

my reasoning is, the govt's action aside, that it is a stupid business decision. it seems that in the long run, they now have a greater chance of drivers letting alcohol effect their jobs. something i would think they would want to avoid. it really makes no sense, imo.

 

Ever since the Exxon Valdez companies are very touchy about employees with substance abuse problems. Once they find out about it they are open to huge law suits if they don't take action. Where I work if you have a DWI at any time in your life time, there are certain jobs you aren't allowed to work. It's 100% about liability and law suits. In today's sue happy environment companies are overly proactive.

 

but if the person does not have a dwi and is seeking help, they are less likely to drive drunk. if they have a dwi, fine. they broke the law. but if not, then they have done nothing wrong.

by discouraging people to seek help, they are increasing the odds of drunk driving. and if one of their drivers does hurt someone, on or off the job, from drunk driving, a good lawyer will claim the companies policies discouraged the drunk driver from getting help.

if a company has a policy that does not punish a person for seeking help for substance abuse, but rather encourages help for substance abuse, they are covering their ass more in lawsuits.

again. it makes no sense from a business standpoint, imo.

 

If they know the person has a problem and do not take action they are wide open to law suits if something happens. Right or wrong that's just a fact.

 

mo money mo money mo money.

 

making it easier, and without fear of punishment, for getting help is how to do it. seeking treatments means the person wont be drinking. that IS taking action.

 

That's always his solution. Spend government money. I-10 between Baton Rouge and New Orleans has kept people working for 30 years.

 

I'm not telling you how it should be in a fairy tale world, I'm telling you how it is in the real world. I should have wings where I can fly to and from work avoiding traffic. However in reality I don't, so I sit on the interstate and bitch. Like I said, it's a liability issue. If you know someone has a problem, you let them drive anyway and something happens you better have damn good insurance because you are going to pay way more since you knew of the problem. That's just the facts.

 

You better have damn good insurance when a lawyer proves your regressive policies were directly responsible for a person not seeking treatment. (And that is my view as a business owner.)

Because in the real world, that is gonna be the person that is really a liability.