summary dismissal . i have been sacked for gross negligence following an accident a month ago . the company said after looking at the tacho that i was going too fast for the situation and did not behave appropriatley.has this happened to anybody else on here? its my first blameworthy accident in 30 years hgv/psv driving .any advice would be gratefully received .
I assume you wish to know if you are being treated too harshly ■■?
If yes, then without knowing the full facts of what happened it is very difficult to comment on.
thanks rog i was nth,bound on the a34 at oxford when i hit the rear of another truck after we both got cut up by cars coming down the sliproad . the company anylised the tacho and said i was driving too fast and too close to the other truck. i continued driving the next day and worked normally until the disiplinary this week.
We are all guilty of getting too close to the vehicle in front now and again but rear ending another vehicle doesn’t leave you much in the way of defence whatever the circumstances of other vehicles involved.
I don’t think this is one you can win.
I think rear ending another vehicle leaves you without much defence against punishment.
But is the punishment appropriate?
GROSS negligence is not the same as plain negligence. Maybe this will help… but I doubt it, sorry
gross negligence n. carelessness in reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, which is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people’s rights to safety. It is more than simple inadvertence, but it is just shy of being intentionally evil. If one has borrowed or contracted to take care of another’s property, then gross negligence is the failure to actively take the care one would of his/her own property. If gross negligence is found by the trier of fact (judge or jury), it can result in the award of punitive damages on top of general and special damages
If not in a union i would get proper advice before appeal.
edit have they treated any other drivers more leniently for similar accidents?
The only defense would be if the other truck had cut suddenly in front of you and braked.
From what you describe it does seem that it is your fault for driving too close but if this is a one off incident in many years of driving and they did not stop you driving for them immediately then they seem to be saying you are not an immediate danger out there but now, after some time, we have changed our minds !!
To my mind, you are either a menace that should not be driving or you are not and if I was not sure then a suspension from driving after the incident would have been the safest way to proceed follwed a driving assessment to determine your capability.
i’m sorry mate but rear ending another truck doesn’t leave you with too many options. depending on your companies disaplinary proceedures i don’t think you have a hope in hell. the only possibility is as rog says if you’re such a danger you should’ve been suspended pending investigation but its a long shot in my opinion.
dilbert:
the company anylised the tacho and said i was driving too fast and too close to the other truck
How they know that from analising the tacho? 
orys:
dilbert:
the company anylised the tacho and said i was driving too fast and too close to the other truckHow they know that from analising the tacho?
A34 so any speed over 80KPH is speeding.
He hit the truck in front so was driving too close. If he wasn’t too close, he’d have stopped in time. Therefore, he is the author of his own misfortune. The only thing he can do is to look at the contract and if what counts as gross misconduct isn’t described in there, ask to see the companies written list of what counts as gross misconduct.
Conor:
orys:
dilbert:
the company anylised the tacho and said i was driving too fast and too close to the other truckHow they know that from analising the tacho?
A34 so any speed over 80KPH is speeding.
He hit the truck in front so was driving too close.
But what if he was driving in proper distance, but, say, he dropped something? Will that be, in that case, the reason (careless driving) and not “too close driving”?
How can they say that from tacho?
It’s not a question about his case but in general: they can’t say that from tacho.
I can think of a few scenarios that would make the driver fairly innocent even though he may have gone up the back of another. But, don’t know the facts of this or want to give ideas so to speak.
orys:
Conor:
orys:
dilbert:
the company anylised the tacho and said i was driving too fast and too close to the other truckHow they know that from analising the tacho?
A34 so any speed over 80KPH is speeding.
He hit the truck in front so was driving too close.
But what if he was driving in proper distance, but, say, he dropped something? Will that be, in that case, the reason (careless driving) and not “too close driving”?
How can they say that from tacho?
It’s not a question about his case but in general: they can’t say that from tacho.
By looking at the Anolog tacho Orys it’s posable to see from the speed trace the decresse of speed therefore from breaking to time and speed of impact it would be posable to determin wether the driver was driving to fast or close to the vehicle infront.
I’m not sure about the info on a digi as it has to be downloaded within 24hrs the other things that could show up are from the trucks on board computer system that can be downloaded if you have the softwear, that shows how the trucks been driven speeds breaking etc.
In the long run wether someone cuts you up or not if you rear end someone then your deemed to be at fault as you should be driving to the conditions of the road, traffic and weather conditions…
People who ride a single carrageway road at above the limit will have stronger evidence against them as they have a disregard for the law in the case of speed limits the same would be for driving above 50 on a dual carrageway just because its 2 lanes of good road dont mean you can or should exceed the limit or travel at a speed deemed unsutable for the conditions, 1ft of snow covering the lanes and a speed limit of 50 dont mean you have to drive at 50 if there is traffic joining a carrageway just because it’s them joining dont mean you have the right to ignor that they are there…and that is the problem with drivers today the “I’m here jack and if you dont like it Cough off”
The fact you hold a licence to drive a certain size vehicle dont mean you know what your doing it just shows you passed a test on that day at that time, It could be the only day that you drove well the rest of the time you could be a rite plonker
he should have been suspended staright away! and then investiagtion into the circumstances,
when any of ours have a bump its instantly investigated and if it seems the driver has made a serious error he will be suspended, if a minor bump then disciplinary but he is allowed to carry on,
but in similar circumstances on A64 last friday travelling along at 50 n/s lane when an artic comes past but he realises he needs the outer ring road turn and pulls straight across in front of me and brakes to slow to take the slip road, he was about 2 foot from my front bumper when he started to move across and brake at the same time! no option but for me to hit brakes sharpish luckily no bump and lucky in the circumstances that I have a camera in the cab that activates under sharp braking ect, it also records i think 20 seconds before the activation so hopefully it was all caught so if i had rear ended the other truck it may have been seen as not my fault…
though the other driver did flash his rear lights so i guess its ok to do this sort of move as long as you flash your indicators
Would there be any link to that court case that went through yesterday. You are probably all familiar with it but I’ve been away from this side for a while.
Wasn’t the driver jailed for because he rear-ended another truck after following too close and also killed some other people?
Therefore, coupled with that information your bosses decided that this could have been a lot worse and the only recourse they had was the ultimate thing. Gross Negligence.
Good luck with your next job, and hopefully this will encourage you to leave a gap next time? 
Wasn’t the driver jailed for because he rear-ended another truck after following too close and also killed some other people?
this guy ain’t killed anyone m8,he rear ended another vehicle,no defence on his part and he is stupid for doing it, ( dilbert will know that himself)but he has had to deal with the consiquences of his stupidity. you can’t compare his accident to the 1 you mention both different accidents with different outcomes.
kitkat:
Wasn’t the driver jailed for because he rear-ended another truck after following too close and also killed some other people?
this guy ain’t killed anyone m8,he rear ended another vehicle,no defence on his part and he is stupid for doing it, ( dilbert will know that himself)but he has had to deal with the consiquences of his stupidity. you can’t compare his accident to the 1 you mention both different accidents with different outcomes.
So you’re saying it’s OK to tailgate as long as you don’t crash?
If I rear ended another vehicle because I had not left sufficient room in front for stopping distance I’d probably get the sack, and have my licence yanked and would probably get prosecuted further. Even if no one got injured or killed. There are often extenuating circumstances, but more often than not I just see what most the other public see. Trucks driving so close together you couldn’t even squeeze a car in between the two.
Lets get things into a realistsic perspective…
NONE of us are perfect drivers.
We all make errors and a good driver will learn from those errors
The drivers who make errors and do not learn from them are the worst ones - they blame anything but themselves for that error and so do not progress into being safer drivers.
Without ongoning driver assessments, the way most learn is from errors albeit minor ones that cause no damage or injury to others.
Is it right to say to a driver who learns from their errors - YOU ARE A BAD DRIVER 
dilbert here again. the police were not interested and refused to take details from witnesses or even our names or addresses! i worked normally for 2 weeks then the company told me it could become a disciplinary matter. the firm has changed hands again and management and disciplinary procedure changes almost weekly with lots of drivers getting pulled in for minor things etc. thanks for all the comments and i will have to see what develops .
So you’re saying it’s OK to tailgate as long as you don’t crash?
Show me where i said it was alright to tailgate and you’ll be 1 of them drivers who don’t do nothing wrong of course you are.
the firm has changed hands again
if the company has changed hands since accident,then i’m pretty sure any slate has to be wiped clean when starting with new owners.