ZiggyPhillips:
Been working for a Genral haulage firm on class 2 for 6 months, after 4 months i decided to put myself trough my class 1, after passing I did the odd day here and there on class 1 but still mainly drove class 2 as my partner was due to have a baby and was easier to keep me local on an rigid than an artic.
My partner gave birth on the 24th of July, I then had two weeks perternity leave, whilst on leave a came across an ad in the paper it was a well known national brandlooking for class 1 drivers the hours and the money seemed great so I sent the an e-mail on the e-mail I stated I was a new class 1 driver. I recived a call from them the next day asking me to come in for an interview which I obviously went to, the interview went well and they were not concerned that I only had a little bit of class 1 experience, two days later they called me to say they wanted to offer me the job, I was over the moon as the hours and money was exactly what I wanted.
I reluctantly gave my notice to my employer, they were not happy and made various attempts to change my mind, when I recived my payslip from them they withdrew my 6 month bonus £700 and my perternity pay £136 x2 so was left with only two weeks basic pay and as I was there just shy of 6 months they were legally intitled to to do this.
So started my new job monday it involved a two day induction which went well, yesterday I finished my induction and was issued with my rota for the next 7 weeks etc… And was told for the rest of the week I would be out with another driver, and was told to come in at 5pm this evening, I turned up at 5pm met the driver I was going out with then we went and put our cards in and done our vehicle checks etc… Once we completed that a manager came out and asked me in to his office, he said he just noticed that my licence shows I have only recently passed my class 1, I said yes I made the chap who interviewed aware of this, he said sorry you our insurance won’t cover you and said he was termanating my employment with the company and sent me home, so now I am stuck with no job! I feel sick especially after having low wages last month and a new baby to support.
Many thanks for taking the time to read this post, and appreciate any opinions on this.
PM me the persons name and company name and address
And I will go and sort it all out for you
failing that you might have a claim in court for lost of earning
I think though you would need that discrimination action to happen at an insurance company level as has happened with the risk premium attached to male vs female drivers. I can’t see the public wearing higher premiums for everyone just for 17 year olds to wrap high-powered cars round trees though, in reality.
I do know our insurers will not lower in below 25 for any amount of additional premium.
It’s definitely acceptable to discriminate on experience we’re not yet at the point where you must give a job to anyone that applies if there is only one job it’s inevitable that some discrimination process has got to take place to choose, it’s just on what grounds is the issue.
Own Account Driver:
I think though you would need that discrimination action to happen at an insurance company level as has happened with the risk premium attached to male vs female drivers. I can’t see the public wearing higher premiums for everyone just for 17 year olds to wrap high-powered cars round trees though, in reality.
I do know our insurers will not lower in below 25 for any amount of additional premium.
It’s definitely acceptable to discriminate on experience we’re not yet at the point where you must give a job to anyone that applies if there is only one job it’s inevitable that some discrimination process has got to take place to choose, it’s just on what grounds is the issue.
Regarding Insurance, if what you say is correct the the advert would, or should state,…need to be 25 years old for insurance purposes… ?
I’m not certain this is the case in the OP’s case ?
Regarding experience, yes i agree with what you say. I would take an experienced person over an inexperienced person anyday. There is argument it cost less by way of instruction/training. There is also counter argument that that “inexperience” is better as you can mould someone to your way of working. But i think that is moot in this case as they employed him.
In any general case, as we know, an employer can just get rid. Don’t need you, decided we don’t want you, don;t think you’ll fit in with the team…etc…all perfectly good reasons to termiate your employment without recourse.
In the OP’s case, he’s been terminated for a specific reason…he hadn’t held his licence long enough. They knew this at the recruitment stage ?
Own Account Driver:
I think though you would need that discrimination action to happen at an insurance company level as has happened with the risk premium attached to male vs female drivers. I can’t see the public wearing higher premiums for everyone just for 17 year olds to wrap high-powered cars round trees though, in reality.
I do know our insurers will not lower in below 25 for any amount of additional premium.
It’s definitely acceptable to discriminate on experience we’re not yet at the point where you must give a job to anyone that applies if there is only one job it’s inevitable that some discrimination process has got to take place to choose, it’s just on what grounds is the issue.
Regarding Insurance, if what you say is correct the the advert would, or should state,…need to be 25 years old for insurance purposes… ?
I’m not certain this is the case in the OP’s case ?
Regarding experience, yes i agree with what you say. I would take an experienced person over an inexperienced person anyday. There is argument it cost less by way of instruction/training. There is also counter argument that that “inexperience” is better as you can mould someone to your way of working. But i think that is moot in this case as they employed him.
In any general case, as we know, an employer can just get rid. Don’t need you, decided we don’t want you, don;t think you’ll fit in with the team…etc…all perfectly good reasons to termiate your employment without recourse.
In the OP’s case, he’s been terminated for a specific reason…he hadn’t held his licence long enough. They knew this at the recruitment stage ?
Don’t get me wrong he has definitely been treated unacceptably badly. My concern is I don’t think there is the legal ammunition on his side for anything other than appealing to those that run the company’s sense of fairness and hope they offer some form of compensation off their own bat.
I also think he might get sucked into spending time fighting this battle that would be better spent looking for something else. Even at his age I am sure there will be something round Avonmouth.
GasGas:
Just a thought…if he’s too young/inexperienced to be covered on the company insurance, then was he covered on his assessment drive?
If not, then the company has committed an offence by allowing him to unknowingly drive while uninsured.
No offence in cases of mistake like this, the third party cover would have been in force but it would have been at the insurer’s discretion whether they paid out if he had damaged the truck in any way, if an age restriction is genuinely in place.
With fleet insurance my experience has been the insurers don’t do a lot of investigating into MOTs drivers age or licence in the same way they do in trying to wriggle out of private drivers claims.
Own Account Driver:
I don’t think there is the legal ammunition on his side for anything other than appealing to those that run the company’s sense of fairness and hope they offer some form of compensation off their own bat.