Training repayment clauses look like prudent cost recovery. Having signed one, enforced one and abolished one, I think they recover little, keep unhappy drivers only briefly and hide the early warning a carrier most needs.
Training repayment clauses look like prudent cost recovery. Having signed one, enforced one and abolished one, I think they recover little, keep unhappy drivers only briefly and hide the early warning a carrier most needs.
Carriers manage pace standards as productivity tools and injuries as safety outcomes, in separate meetings. On an LTL dock the two are the same decision, and the newest workers carry most of its cost.
Many carriers stretch the federal testing programme for drivers over every role they employ. I argue for running that programme exactly as required, testing other roles by the risks of their work, and explaining the difference to drivers.