Swift responded on October 9, 2015 (Dkt 689), and Drivers replied on October 22 (Dkt 695). Thanks for watching Intro Music: I have received permission from the band to use this song in my videos. Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport. . They are just hurting investors if anything. It is a small step in accountability. Posted on Friday, February 12 2010 at 2:09pm. Getman Sweeney is hopeful that the Court will affirm our position and reverse the District Court, since the Circuit already ruled that Plaintiffs were correct on this precise question in its prior ruling on the mandamus petition. Click here to review Swift and IELs response to our motion. You may be part of the class action if the Court later certifies the case as a class action. However, certain claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act are not covered in the case until your Consent to Sue Form is returned to the plaintiffs attorneys and then filed with the Court. The Ninth Circuit agreed to stay its decision but only for 90 days, giving Swift time to make another stay motion to the Supreme Court. Swift Settlement Update Posted March 27, 2020. The Ninth Circuit Decides Oral Argument Not Needed. In that brief, the drivers will argue that Judge Sedwicks decision allowing discovery is hardly a final order and no statute confers the right to an appeal from this order. Due to the size of the class, it may take some time for class members to receive their notices. An Iowa federal court ruled that a class of CRST Expedited drivers can proceed with most of its claims in a wage lawsuit based on alleged predatory lease agreements. If you would like to join, please navigate toSwift Justiceand click Join the Case., Waiting On the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Posted on January 4, 2013. Generally claims can be made at least for the three years preceding the date the complaint was filed. Posted on Monday, August 2 2010 at 4:32pm. Pathetic! After Judge Sedwick denied Plaintiffs request to reconsider his decision referring this case to an arbitrator, and after his denial of Plaintiffs request that he certify the issue to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Plaintiffs continue to believe that the District Court erred by referring to the arbitrator the question of whether the case is exempt from arbitration under Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act. They claimed that this allowed drivers to make their own schedules, which would classify them as independent contractors. They wouldnt have to if their lawyers did their job when the contract was originally drafted. Two, they drive freight costs down by lowballing bids to levels that make it impossible for smaller and independents to compete. On August 6, 2013, Swift Transportation Company acquired Central Refrigerated Transportation, Inc. in a transaction valued at $225 million. The Ninth Circuit ruled that the Court must decide whether this case is arbitrable under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) or not before sending the case to arbitration. inventory of Freightliner, Peterbilt, and International truck models. Posted on Thursday, April 21 2011 at 11:50am. I Need CDL Training That ruling was important for many reasons first, it prevented the case from being sent to arbitration, and second, the Court agreed with Plaintiffs that drivers are employees as a matter of law. in Collinge.v.Intelliquick finding drivers very similar to Swift drivers to be employees as a matter of law, Opposition to Swifts Petition For Mandamus, denied Swifts motion to delay the proceedings, Click here to review the Courts Decision, a schedule for determining a critical issue in this case, Click here to review the stipulation and Order, Click here to read Swifts petition for certiorari. Parties Met for Mediation, Waiting on Hearing Date Posted November 16, 2017. If the settlement is approved by the Court, it will resolve the claims of roughly 20,000 owner operator drivers (since 1999) in this case. LEASE PURCHASE PROGRAM Choose any eligible home listed for sale Commit to a one-year lease upfront Pay a standard rental deposit Rental rate certainty for five years* Right to Purchase at a locked-in rate for five years* Option to buy any time during the lease No penalties for deciding not to purchase *Three years in Texas I give my express consent authorizing TruckersReport and its. Swift is publicly owned. It has taken over a year for the Circuit to set a date for argument. Swift wants the drivers to have to ask that question individually in arbitration where it knows that few, if any, drivers will be able to afford litigating the case individually. Click here to review the arbitration decision. The Drivers consider it a hopeful sign that the Circuit decided not to hear argument, as the Ninth Circuit previously decided that the drivers claims cannot be sent to arbitration without the District Court first deciding whether they are employees or contractors, when the Drivers filed a mandamus petition in that Court. The Plaintiffs lawyers in this case were required to take steps to protect these claims from interference by a proposed class action settlement in theEllis v Swift Transportationcase. WOW! District Court Denies Swifts Motion for Reconsideration Posted January 22, 2015. Swift Trucks Inc Corsicana, Texas 75110 Phone: +1 888-768-5954 Email Seller Video Chat View Details Get Shipping Quotes Apply for Financing Heavy Duty Trucks - Sleeper Trucks 1 2020 FREIGHTLINER CASCADIA 126 Sleeper Trucks For Sale Price: USD $108,000 Get Financing* Stock Number: 200401 Mileage: 306,819 mi Engine Manufacturer: Detroit If you are already a plaintiff in this case, you may call us if you wish us to send the letter on your behalf. Click here to see the First Amended Complaint. Please select the number of verifiable months youve been driving professionally using your Class A CDL within the last 3 years. This case was also handled by Martin & Bonnett, co-counsel for the drivers in this case. Now that the Arizona District Court has ruled against Swifts arbitration motion, and said that the case must remain in federal court, the next step after these appeals will be to revisit the class and collective action motions. 352 Drivers Join Lawsuit Against Swift August 8, 2013, As of this date, 352 drivers have joined the lawsuit against Swift Transportation. Click here to review Swifts opposition brief. Plaintiffs filed their Opposition to Defendants Motion to Compel Arbitration of the claims in this case. . The lease purchase program is a convenient way to own your own truck. Plaintiffs ask the Court to find that the lease and ICOA are unconscionable as a matter of law and that Swift misclassifies owner operators as independent contractors, instead of treating them as employees as the law requires. The plaintiffs class action lawyers have defeated certain arbitration agreements and successfully argued to the courts that they are unenforceable for a number of reasons including the FAA exemption, poor choice of law, and poor drafting of the arbitration agreement. On April 5th, Judge Berman transferred venue in the case to the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. The rest will be awarded an amount commensurate with their own employment time. Because the Federal Arbitration Act (under which the Court sent the case to arbitration), does not apply to contracts of employment of workers in interstate transportation (such as truck drivers), the Circuit Court held that the District Court cannot send our case to arbitration until it has determined whether the drivers are employees. We are awaiting decisions by the District Court on all pending discovery motions. We will be in touch with affected clients individually following additional discussion with the lawyers for the parties in the Montalvo case and/or after the final settlement fairness hearing with the court on October 30, 2015. Lease term can be either 3 or 4 years 3. Why arent you walked away when they punched you? Court Sets Argument on Temporary Restraining Order and Stay Posted February 6, 2017. If you receive a letter informing you that you owe a debt, and you dispute this debt, you should know that under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, you may send the bill collector a letter that you dispute the debt. Beware of western express, will rob you blind. Plaintiffs argument is based on the fact that the Lease agreement demands that claims be litigated in Court, that the ICOAs arbitration provision conflicts with the Lease and is superceded by it. (ltr to Berman stamped 3.24.10.pdf 2MB), Posted on Wednesday, March 24 2010 at 4:14pm, Defendants have requested Judge Berman to give them permission to make a motion to dismiss the case in favor of arbitration. Click here to see the First Amended Complaint. Swifts Increasing Desperation Posted February 26, 2015. Its all subsidiary companies that own all of Primes trucks. Plaintiffs also argued that the arbitration clause was unconscionable and the defendants had waived the argument through their litigation tactics. Settlement Update Posted January 14, 2021 A Claims Administrator (Settlement Services, Inc.) has been appointed to send each driver affected by the settlement a Notice advising them of the terms of the settlement, what it will mean for them, how to file a claim in the case, how to withdraw, or object to the deal, and how to update your address so that you can receive your share of the proceeds. (17 frist amended cplt.pdf 869KB) Defendants have not yet answered the complaint. Maybe Im wrong I have a truck signed on with Mercer transportation by the time you finish renting a trailer waiting for loads there is no money to be made. [The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals] requires the [Arizona District] court to look at the economic realities of the parties working relationship and not just the contract at issue or the parties subjective intent. All briefing has been completed in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on the question of whether the District Court erred by sending this case to arbitration without deciding first whether the Plaintiffs are exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act. Drivers are hired by the owner operator and are at the mercy of that owner. Motions to Compel, Motions for Sanctions, and Appeals Posted October 27, 2015. (final mandamus petition _2_.pdf 128KB) A Writ of Mandamus is an extraordinary writ that seeks to have a Court of Appeals correct error by a district court, even though no appeal is presently available. Any truckers who are part of this case, or who are considering whether to join this case, are welcome to stop by Getman Sweeney to discuss the case and your individual facts. Swift filed itsresponse. You know what this means?! http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view_subpage.php?pk_id=0000007482, Plaintiffs filed reply papers in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in support of our petition for mandamus directing the District Court to hear the question of employment status before sending the case to arbitration. (20 CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN.pdf 46KB), Posted on Friday, February 19 2010 at 1:06pm. To Protect Claims in This Case, Plaintiffs Have Objected to Settlement in Montalvo v. Swift and Calix v. Central Refrigerated Posted October 2, 2015. 6-11 Months Id like to see a computer do all the physical labor. (billing dispute form.pdf 6KB) If you wish to send your own letter or are not a plaintiff in this case, please make sure you send the letter by certified mail, return receipt requested. Judge Berman has set a Court conference for April 5, 2010 at 9:30 a.m. in his Courtroom at the U.S. District Court in Manhattan to discuss the pending motions (transfer of venue, arbitration). The courts video feed of the argument is available here. March 2, 2023 Late last year, an allegedly shortchanged Swiftie named Michelle Sterioff filed a class-action lawsuit against Live Nation and Ticketmaster over the Eras Tour fiasco. The timeline for a decision is uncertain. Dan Getman, the attorney for the plaintiffs in this case will be speaking about the Swift case with Evan Lockridge on his show the Lockridge Report, Thursday, February 11, 2010, on Sirius XM Satellite Radios Road Dog Trucking channel 147 (the Lockridge Report airs weekdays 2 pm eastern/1 pm central). Slow trucks with sensors that are tuned up to very sensitive " saftey issues". They should have to pay us for on duty time and mileage. Blood suckers each and everyone of these companies!!!!! Furthermore , this entitlement generation and epidemic is further fueled by greedy bottom feeding lawyers who advertise every where you turn. Specifically, Plaintiffs argue that the Court may only send a case to arbitration if either the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), or the Arizona Arbitration Act (AAA) applies. Getman Sweeney would like to speak with former Swift Owner Operators who have documents or other evidence (such as photographs, emails, QualComm messages) concerning: 1) collections efforts by Swift after turning in their truck or having it repossessed, or Although we hoped Judge Berman would keep the case, venue transfer motions are easy ones for defendants to win. Us xpress Motor carrier company Chatanooga tn Bait and switch scam for lease purchase. They will be dead and buried by the time this gets paid as if it ever will. The Drivers, and the Court have agreed that the determination requires considering Swifts policies and practices in addition to the contract and lease. A tentative settlement was reached between the parties which called for each owner operator to receive $50 in settlement of these claims. Major Preliminary Victory! Further, please let Getman Sweeney know if you have been overbilled by defendants, or threatened with the higher charges. Unfortunately, Judge Sedwick ruled that the Swift arbitration agreement compels all issues in this case to be heard by an arbitrator, rather than the Court. Posted on Wednesday, February 9 2011 at 9:34am. TheNew Primecase held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) Section 1 Exemption also exempts independent contractor agreements for workers in interstate transportation (such as truckers) from mandatory arbitration in federal courts. Click here to read the Plaintiffs motion papers. Here's the PayPal info: https://www.paypal.me/truckertodd806 Here's the Cash App $cashtag:$truckertodd806My Venmo is:@truckertodd806Link for the Mudflap app to save on fuel: https://www.mudflapinc.com/truckertodd In order to argue against Plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction barring Swift and IELs collections for the full amount of the remaining lease payments following their putting a driver in default status, Swift has filed a remarkable affidavit, stating that Defendants will demand the full remaining lease payments in its demand from drivers, but will not, in fact, seek all remaining payments. Im sure Swift was astonished that their arbitration agreement was rejected. No big company is going to pay you for each & Every actual mile you drive. And we believe that no driver should be forced to participate in this meeting. In this case, Swift and IEL claim that they do not attempt to collect the full amount of unpaid lease payments. (172 D Response to P Motion for PI.pdf 125KB) Drivers who have information contrary to the claims raised by Swift are urged to call Getman Sweeney and speak with Janice or Kathy. last edited on Wednesday, May 12 2010 at 6:11pm, Posted on Tuesday, April 6 2010 at 11:48am, On April 2nd, Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction to stop Swift and IEL from instituting collections measures and to prevent them from furnishing negative credit reports on drivers they consider to be in default. Plaintiffs have amended the complaint to raise claims under the federal Forced Labor statute, 18 U.S.C. - Posted January 15, 2019. Although the case is venued in Arizona, the case was assigned to a Judge from Alaska, the Honorable John W. Sedwick. Then do a check on their Swift lawsuit update. The parties now have a short period of time to conduct discovery prior to a trial by the District Court on this critical issue. Because the case is not concluded, appeals are discretionary and must be approved by both the District Court and the Appeals Court. I will probably not have anything close to 2k when I am forced to stop due to ill health. It is the very definition of the words wage slave. Under the law of contract, plaintiffs seek to declare the contracts void or voidable for unconscionability. U get RAND MCNALLY MILES.NOT PRATICAL MILES.IT STINKS.EVERY PROFFESSIONAL DRIVER LOSES OUT ON RAND MCNALLY.NOT SO WITH PRATICAL.A DIFFICULT LIFESTYLE TO SAY THE LEAST.I STAY IN COMBAT MODE 24 HOURS A DAY. State statutory and contract claims have different limitation periods (six in NY, four in CA). The Supreme Court gets approximately 7,000 requests to hear cases each year, but hears only one to two percent. On July 24, 2017, the Drivers filed theiropposition to Swifts appealof the District Courts order finding that drivers are employees and thus exempt from arbitration. .. ive yet to find a trucking Co. or broker who is hounst in the least. Being leased to someone is not being an Independent Contractor. Plaintiffs have filed 57 separate arbitration demands with the American Arbitration Association for the issues presented in this case. Address: 2200 S. 75th Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85043; Phone Number: 1-800-800-2200; . This will ABSOLUTELY be over turned. FedEx ground also. Well, in the end, they will lose the independence that comes from being an independent contractor. The parties expect Judge Sedwick to rule shortly on the issue of the scope of discovery and trial. The court has asked Plaintiffs to respond no later than February 10, 2017. While the case (226 Motion for Reconsideration re Order on Motion to Certify Class.pdf 45KB) Reconsideration is not commonly granted, but in this case, Plaintiffs believe the Court overlooked clear law. Swift offers several lease programs to help drivers get into their own vehicle. Where I have my truck signed on Im said to be independent contractor, but cannot haul freight for anyone but them, do not have choice of loads and have to take what they give me called forced dispatch , I found a load one time and they got pissed told me I do not call the shots. Settlement Services, Inc. (SSI) Claims Administrator: 844-330-6991, Filing/Postmark Deadline for Disputes as to Calculations: October 15, 2019, Swift Settlement Update Posted August 16, 2019. We expect the checks will be mailed in mid-April 2020. The settlement cannot take effect until the Court approves it, and the approval process will consider comments from the affected drivers. 2 Years On May 11th, Plaintiffs made a motion to certify the Fair Labor Standards Act minimum wage claims in this case as a collective action. The motion seeks court approval to mail a notice of the case to all class members, advising them of their rights to join the case. If any employee suffered retaliation, Swift and IEL would be liable for double the injury caused by retaliation against an employee. Swift is also self insured. The process for deciding whether the drivers are employees has not been settled by the Court. Its a pot of 100million split amongst 20k drivers. (188 P Response in Oppose Motion to Compel Arbitration and Dismiss P claims.pdf 152KB), Plaintiffs have filed their reply brief in support of certification of a collective action and the mailing of notice to all potential class members in the case. US District Court Judge Sedwick has set expedited argument on Plaintiffs motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Swifts motion for a stay of the case pending appeal for Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 10:00 am in Phoenix. Swift Transportation. Settlement checks are scheduled to be mailed beginning next week (April 6-10). According to court documents, Swift Transportation is agreeing to pay $7.25 million. Your email address will not be published. Taylor Swift's lawyers filed a motion on Wednesday to dismiss a copyright infringement lawsuit that claims she copied lyrics for her hit 2014 song . Swift allegedly made unlawful deductions from the drivers pay for truck lease payments, gas, equipment, maintenance, insurance, tolls and other expenses. The parties are now ready to brief whether or not Lease Operators are employees or contractors for purposes of deciding whether the Federal Arbitration Act applies to the drivers or not so that the District Court can decide. The very first line in my JB Hunt contract states that I am not an employee and a few lines later says this is an at will contact and can be terminated by either party with notice. The Swift Transportation settlement is on schedule, and we do not anticipate any delays. Click here to review Defendants Letter Brief requesting transfer of the case to Arizona. Swift has filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court asking the high court to hear Swifts challenge to the Ninth Circuits decision that the District Court must decide whether the Federal Arbitration Act applies to this case before sending the case to arbitration. Click here to review the Case Management Plan in the case. To protect the class, Getman Sweeney and Martin Bonnett have been trying to obtain an agreement from Swifts attorneys to the effect that claims in this case would not be barred by that settlement, if approved by the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. What goes around comes around and God does not like ugly. Please continue to check back here for further updates, and if any of your contact information changes, please call 844-330-6991 to update it. 805 17K views 6 months ago If you decide to contact Swift Transportation about company driver or lease purchase opportunities please call Michelle Cantrell at 864-968-7605 and give her my. Swift and IEL have refused to pay the AAAs fees necessary to permit the arbitrations to go forward and under the AAAs arbitration practices, these individual arbitrations can only occur once the Plaintiff pays substantial filing fees, or agrees to incur additional indebtedness to later pay such filing fees. The amount might go up to $110,000 if you are an experienced driver or if you work overtime slightly. Swift replied to Plaintiffs response to their motions to compel discovery (674) on August 14th. The Ninth Circuit had agreed to stay its decision, giving Swift 90 days in which to make another stay motion to the Supreme Court, which it has not done. We opposed Swifts application for a stay and asked the Court to sanction Swift for a frivolous motion. Click here to review the Plaintiffs motion for reconsideration. This is a big milestone, said driver attorney Dan Getman according to the Wall Street Journal. CDL Grad, No Experience Article. We have filed discovery demands asking Swift and IEL to provide documents we believe will be primary evidence in the case. Drivers Opposition to Swift Appeal Filed Posted August 28, 2017. The Order reads, in part. Not to worry though, I am confident Swift will appeal and the Judge Sedwicks ruling will be overturned. We will continue to see longer days on the road with less pay. Im working for a poor excuse for an Owner Op thats trying the same bull with me and he keeps trying to 1099 me and next week Im going to find another carrier to work for. When you dispute the debt and request validation, by law, the debt collector must verify the debt claim and must cease debt collection activities during this time period. (187 p Reply in Support MOTION to Certify Class.pdf 78KB), Posted on Tuesday, July 20 2010 at 2:33pm. The Lawyers for the drivers argued that Swift was acting in violation of federal minimum wage laws because the drivers are in reality employees, and not independent. Swift then filed Motions to Compel Discovery of Plaintiffs (646and649) on July 22nd, and filed Motions for a Protective Order (652and654) on July 20th. During the legal battle, Swift argued that drivers could choose to refuse loads, or take loads from other companies. And you wonder whats wrong with the industry ? If you have your CDL and want to be an Owner/Operator, check out these great programs. last edited on Monday, December 6 2010 at 9:39am, Posted on Wednesday, October 20 2010 at 5:32pm. The Court has not set a date for oral argument. The attorneys are interested in speaking with FORMER driver managers and other FORMER Swift and IEL management (including recruiters for IEL) to learn the details of how Swift and IELs operations worked from the perspective of those inside the companies. Click here to review the 9th Circuits decision. This stinging defeat essentially forced Swiftto settle given their huge exposure in a class-action case. Posted on Wednesday, July 27 2011 at 2:43pm. The attorneys are handling this case on a contingent basis and will only be paid when we win through a settlement or final judgment.