How common is it becoming that company’s want you to pay for any damage that you cause however minor or major? Started with a company who tried to make me sign contract with this clause in it I didn’t sign it.
mjallby:
I didn’t sign it.
So you didn’t continue to work there then?
Not signing it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. You need to raise a written grievance and get the bit you don’t like amended or leave. If you simply continue working there then you have accepted the conditions.
Something along those lines 
I thought that those ideas went out of the industry donkey’s years ago, it is why companies have insurance! 
Do you pay for fuel and tyres as well? 
This is why captains go down with their ships! 
Pete.
Diddy compaines use this practice you know the likes of Pollocks…
merc0447:
Diddy compaines use this practice you know the likes of Pollocks…
This guy will work for free for a few years then…depending what he had on the back and the damage he did to the bridge, his grandkids may well still be paying for it…
We get a “compliance” bonus which is removed for extreme wuckfittery.
They can’t take anything out of wages unless you both agree, don’t sign and if you get or keep job they can’t touch you or your money without going to court. Then they lose.
shep532:
mjallby:
I didn’t sign it.So you didn’t continue to work there then?
Not signing it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. You need to raise a written grievance and get the bit you don’t like amended or leave. If you simply continue working there then you have accepted the conditions.
Something along those lines
No I walked second job I’ve walked out of in 2 months after 14 years with my previous employer
gezt:
They can’t take anything out of wages unless you both agree, don’t sign and if you get or keep job they can’t touch you or your money without going to court. Then they lose.
I’ve been on that side of the fence as an employer and you aren’t necessarily correct. There are ways a company can make this work and stand up in court. It’s all down to wording of contracts and notice given etc etc.
I can see why they would have such a clause in the contract as a lot of fleet policies are almost self insurance for own damage due to high excess. Those that say “that’s what insurance is for” when the excess is over £1000 and your claims history at the end of the year means your insurer doesn’t want to even renew it just isn’t worth claiming for a lot of damage so it basically comes out of the bank account. Kind of annoying when it is negligent damage.
its to make people give a sht about the trucks there driving, and not the "fck it attitude its not mine"
i have it on mine take it or leave it, no sign no job simple, and its only for the excess “NOT” the full amount for the repair, not the full amount. if its just a little ding then they lose some bonus
burnley-si:
its to make people give a sht about the trucks there driving, and not the "fck it attitude its not mine"i have it on mine take it or leave it, no sign no job simple, and its only for the excess “NOT” the full amount for the repair, not the full amount. if its just a little ding then they lose some bonus
Best way ,make the thoughtless driver pay up
merc0447:
Diddy compaines use this practice you know the likes of Pollocks…
Are you sure it’s spelt with a p & not a b…?
There seem to be quite a few companies making drivers pay their insurances excess usually £500 in the event of a own fault accident, be that damage to the company vehicle or a 3rd parties property /vehicle
burnley-si:
its to make people give a sht about the trucks there driving, and not the "fck it attitude its not mine"i have it on mine take it or leave it, no sign no job simple, and its only for the excess “NOT” the full amount for the repair, not the full amount. if its just a little ding then they lose some bonus
terrible approach. i’ve never, or ever will work for some who operates like that. if you need to do this so that people give a ■■■■, then you need to improve your interviewing technique.
if i had to pay for damage, it wouldn’t make me give anymore of a ■■■■, i give a ■■■■.
and this isn’t a lack of confidence in my own abilities, everybody makes mistakes at some point, if you don’t appreciate that and factor it into your business plan, then that’s your mistake!
I’d never work for a firm that did this. But I do take pride in getting my vehicle back at the end of the day in the same condition I took it out in. We have damage forms where I work and I fill it in to the best of my ability.
merc0447:
Diddy compaines use this practice you know the likes of Pollocks…
commercialmotor.com/latest-n … ing-driver
It may be old news, but it sounds like they are nice people to work for (cough, cough). I wonder if they are struggling to find drivers?
cav551:
merc0447:
Diddy compaines use this practice you know the likes of Pollocks…commercialmotor.com/latest-n … ing-driver
It may be old news, but it sounds like they are nice people to work for (cough, cough). I wonder if they are struggling to find drivers?
Blimey. Sound like real pleasant people.
They should change their name to “couldn’t give a pollock”
I can understand why employers do this, as there are many drivers who dont give a ■■■■, simply because they dont have to pay for it, a rear light, a tyre hitting the kerb, a bumper dent etc etc, all of which can be avoided…the last company i worked for had to pay hundreds of thousands of pounds inn repairs, because their excess was so high, with a mixture of agency and full time staff, lots of training etc it still happened…so what is an employer supposed to do ? If like some of the posters on here,they are such good drivers, you have no worries…do you.
If that were the case some of the idiots I work with would end up losing their homes, we regularly top 10 grand a week.
Most of it done by the company drivers.
wheelnutt:
merc0447:
Diddy compaines use this practice you know the likes of Pollocks…This guy will work for free for a few years then…depending what he had on the back and the damage he did to the bridge, his grandkids may well still be paying for it…
Looks like M&S “equipment” on the back, so no damage to the load apart from re-stacking, which will be a pain if they are half-trays.