New Prime denied arbitration again in wage lawsuit


Mike

Well-Known Member
Staff member
New Prime’s latest in a series of attempts to compel arbitration of claims in a class action wage lawsuit was denied.

Last week, a Massachusetts District Court denied the Springfield, Mo.-based trucking company’s motion to compel arbitration of the opt-in plaintiffs’ claims, saying it had waived its right under Missouri law. The court also asserted that New Prime was dragging the case out, saying that the trucking company’s “conduct reflects dilatory litigation tactics at their worst.”

It was New Prime’s fourth attempt to arbitrate a case that was originally filed by truck driver Dominic Oliveira in March 2015. The class action lawsuit claims that the trucking company misclassified employees as independent contractors and that it violated the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Missouri minimum wage.

 

New Prime’s latest in a series of attempts to compel arbitration of claims in a class action wage lawsuit was denied.

Last week, a Massachusetts District Court denied the Springfield, Mo.-based trucking company’s motion to compel arbitration of the opt-in plaintiffs’ claims, saying it had waived its right under Missouri law. The court also asserted that New Prime was dragging the case out, saying that the trucking company’s “conduct reflects dilatory litigation tactics at their worst.”

It was New Prime’s fourth attempt to arbitrate a case that was originally filed by truck driver Dominic Oliveira in March 2015. The class action lawsuit claims that the trucking company misclassified employees as independent contractors and that it violated the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Missouri minimum wage.

Unnecessary time and expense’

maybe another company needs to make a filing for bankruptcy...
 
New Prime’s latest in a series of attempts to compel arbitration of claims in a class action wage lawsuit was denied.

Last week, a Massachusetts District Court denied the Springfield, Mo.-based trucking company’s motion to compel arbitration of the opt-in plaintiffs’ claims, saying it had waived its right under Missouri law. The court also asserted that New Prime was dragging the case out, saying that the trucking company’s “conduct reflects dilatory litigation tactics at their worst.”

It was New Prime’s fourth attempt to arbitrate a case that was originally filed by truck driver Dominic Oliveira in March 2015. The class action lawsuit claims that the trucking company misclassified employees as independent contractors and that it violated the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Missouri minimum wage.

Practices from companies like this is why California and probably other states are going to create more laws like AB 5.
 
Practices from companies like this is why California and probably other states are going to create more laws like AB 5.
I ran for Prime, and my experience was they were a pretty straightforward outfit. This Olivetti guy is trying to claim that he was forced into signing a couple of contracts - bullshit. No one put a gun to his head.
 
I ran for Prime, and my experience was they were a pretty straightforward outfit. This Olivetti guy is trying to claim that he was forced into signing a couple of contracts - bullshit. No one put a gun to his head.
I’ve never ran for them. I have talked to a few of the drivers. From what they told me it seems as though every one of them was getting the shaft. These weren’t disgruntled employees either. They all seemed to be fairly happy, but the prices they were paying for these trucks, plus they had to have the company authorize any maintenance from their maintenance fund.
 
I’ve never ran for them. I have talked to a few of the drivers. From what they told me it seems as though every one of them was getting the shaft. These weren’t disgruntled employees either. They all seemed to be fairly happy, but the prices they were paying for these trucks, plus they had to have the company authorize any maintenance from their maintenance fund.

All probably true, but the bottom line on these deals is that they are not forced on anybody.

In all these lease purchase deals, all the rules are laid out, as is the truck pricing.

They are bad deals, but people are willing to sign them, and IMO, have no justification to be complaining after the fact.
 
All probably true, but the bottom line on these deals is that they are not forced on anybody.

In all these lease purchase deals, all the rules are laid out, as is the truck pricing.

They are bad deals, but people are willing to sign them, and IMO, have no justification to be complaining after the fact.
True enough
 
I’ve never ran for them. I have talked to a few of the drivers. From what they told me it seems as though every one of them was getting the shaft. These weren’t disgruntled employees either. They all seemed to be fairly happy, but the prices they were paying for these trucks, plus they had to have the company authorize any maintenance from their maintenance fund.
Let's all sue BHPH dealerships because they want what the car is worth just as a down payment!

C'mon man. Just walk away when it's a raw deal.
 
Let's all sue BHPH dealerships because they want what the car is worth just as a down payment!

C'mon man. Just walk away when it's a raw deal.
I never said to sue or not to sue. I only said these kinds of leases are the reason trucking is included in AB5. Truth be told I hope these companies go broke, and I Don feel all that sorry for the drivers because they agreed to take it in the ass.
 
I never said to sue or not to sue. I only said these kinds of leases are the reason trucking is included in AB5. Truth be told I hope these companies go broke, and I Don feel all that sorry for the drivers because they agreed to take it in the ass.
I hear you. As long as these truckers can't play victim and the companies doing it stop doing it. Not that either will happen.
 
I never said to sue or not to sue. I only said these kinds of leases are the reason trucking is included in AB5. Truth be told I hope these companies go broke, and I Don feel all that sorry for the drivers because they agreed to take it in the ass.

California could care less how bad the lease deals were. This is merely tax revenue creation for them.

AB5 screwed over virtually every type of contractor there is in California. For example, painters. There are painters that have employees and are contracted by home builders. Under AB5, these painters businesses no longer exist. The builder must now employ them.

The list goes on for miles. In the short term, tax revenue skyrockets. In the long run, it will just increase the Exodus out of California.
 
California could care less how bad the lease deals were. This is merely tax revenue creation for them.

AB5 screwed over virtually every type of contractor there is in California. For example, painters. There are painters that have employees and are contracted by home builders. Under AB5, these painters businesses no longer exist. The builder must now employ them.

The list goes on for miles. In the short term, tax revenue skyrockets. In the long run, it will just increase the Exodus out of California.
But in regards to trucking(because I don’t know anything else) the 1099 scam and lease purchase scam has gone on for years. Yes it causes the state to lose tax revenue, but also shifts the burden to those that do pay. On top of that it’s another way to “save” money thus be able to run freight at a cheaper rate which makes it even harder to compete when you are doing it the right way.

I don’t have a problem with a guy buying the truck and leasing with a carrier. I know these guys will get hurt, and it’s not just. I do however despise the big mega lease purchase deals and the company drive 1099 deal. Those are simply a way to lower the wage burden on the carrier. Hell the lease purchase goes even farther and it becomes a revenue stream.

I don’t want to sound like an A hole, but if the only way you can become an owner op is by signing one of these maybe you’re not ready yet.
 
But in regards to trucking(because I don’t know anything else) the 1099 scam and lease purchase scam has gone on for years. Yes it causes the state to lose tax revenue, but also shifts the burden to those that do pay. On top of that it’s another way to “save” money thus be able to run freight at a cheaper rate which makes it even harder to compete when you are doing it the right way.

I don’t have a problem with a guy buying the truck and leasing with a carrier. I know these guys will get hurt, and it’s not just. I do however despise the big mega lease purchase deals and the company drive 1099 deal. Those are simply a way to lower the wage burden on the carrier. Hell the lease purchase goes even farther and it becomes a revenue stream.

I don’t want to sound like an A hole, but if the only way you can become an owner op is by signing one of these maybe you’re not ready yet.
It's the mega way of maintaining that bulk purchase discount. Buy more than you need, get huge discounts, lease the ones that sit for prices that pay for two trucks, get it back if the driver fails, profit.

It's a ginormous profit center for them.
 
It's the mega way of maintaining that bulk purchase discount. Buy more than you need, get huge discounts, lease the ones that sit for prices that pay for two trucks, get it back if the driver fails, profit.

It's a ginormous profit center for them.
Exactly! Buy a truck for a 100k sell it for 190. And some guy will do it because he has bad credit.

Well it’s no effing wonder your credit is worse than a 3 year old’s there Warren buffet
 
Exactly! Buy a truck for a 100k sell it for 190. And some guy will do it because he has bad credit.

Well it’s no effing wonder your credit is worse than a 3 year old’s there Warren buffet
Yup. And its already got like 200k on it because some company driver(s) who couldn't hack it already had it for a year or two. So they already made like a quarter mil profit off it in cartage.
 

Back
Top