Conflict of Interest?

Steady Eddie · Jul 18, 2005

Conflict of Interest?

What are your thoughts with company employee(s) who are working in the home office of a company having trucks signed on. This may be a common practice but to me it could be a conflict of interest not to say it could show favoritism on who gets loaded. I saw one employee working in dispatch, and that employee has over 5 trucks signed on. I also know that some dispatchers have trucks and some have Spouses driving. Who would be getting the loads you think?

I can see how a company would allow this, it’s good for the company to have a stable owner with multiple trucks signed on.

Any of you know if this is standard practice in the Expeditors world?

Steady

RichM · Jul 18, 2005

I have heard of this happening,only with LEA Agents. I would definitely consider it a conflict of interest.A dispatcher could easily hide ownership of a truck by putting it in a relatives name and then taking good care of that truck. But I also believe most companies have their dispatchers work a geographical region,so if dispatcher A is assigned to MN and WI and his/her truck is in New England they might not be able to influence the assisgned loads.

What I think actually goes on is favortism to large fleet owners,say 10 and up truck fleets. The companies know these owners have major investments and so want to keep them happy with the $ rolling in.

My thoughts only,no hard proof of these theories.

merkurfan · Jul 19, 2005

a LOT of lea's have their own trucks. The company I am singed with is a LEA and we have 5 of our own trucks. That is kind of the way it works. I know of 2 others that have their own trucks as well.

We kind of work as a team, sharing loads the we can't cover with them and vice versa. Of course for a out of town landstar truck, this method would really suck.

ATeam · Jul 20, 2005

It's no secret, and the company does not deny, that some Landstar agents run their own fleets. It should be naturally assumed that an agent that owns his or her own trucks will load them first and with the best loads they can before looking for other trucks to haul the same freight. LEA drivers have told me so and make that very assumption. It seems not to be a problem for them since Landstar has a huge agent network which drivers can tap into. If they don't like one, there are many others to choose.

That's significantly different than a company that has a central dispatch system to which access is limited. If insiders have access to loads and can assign them to trucks they or their relatives own, that is a conflict of interest, in my view.

LDB · Jul 20, 2005

I like the saying avoid all appearance of evil. No company should have employees in a position to benefit more than non-employees. Policy should be no vehicles in the fleet. That is the only way to avoid favoritism and conflict of interest as well as the appearance of same and the negative impact on morale and opinion of contractors/employees and the general public.

Leo
truck 4958
73 KE5FJG

Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like.

RichM · Jul 20, 2005

Years ago Roberts in the 3rd/4th quarter Roberts used to put on Company drivers in rental D units. They were guaranteed $400 per week or 25% of thegross whichever was greater. Every night they were put up in a motel and had no expenses other then food.

Roberts always claimed that they were at the bottom of the dispatch board but as some of these drivers would tell it,after 10-12 hours off they would be off and running while the o/o's would sit.

At the end of December they would be let go without the time in to collect unemployment. Nedless to say there was a bunch of unhappy O/O's while this went on,in later years they stopped this practice.

SHADY · Jul 21, 2005

I believe the best way to decide whether there is a conflict, is to think of your self in the position of an employee with some trucks. It is that time of year when business is slow and your truck payments are comming due. Do you seek a little boost in freight or do you dig deep in your savings? When I worked for P2 and had been sitting for 24 hrs in IL a driver pulled up next to me and we started talking. he had just unloaded and was dispached within 20 min. I was still there. Further, P2 does not say that there are no company trucks. Some drivers of P2 trucks will not stop if they see another P2 truck. Draw your own conclusions.
My opinion is that it is the lack of a company ethics policy that allowed this practice to start. But once an employee has a big investment in trucks it is hard to change the rules. Like the guy at my company who is I believe runing 26 D units. Why would he go to work every day and pay someone to look after the trucks? :+

Steady Eddie · Jul 21, 2005

As far as employees with trucks, that’s fine. My point was, employees in authority positions. Ones that could be the companies lower management, dispatchers, and fleet coordinators. This is where I believe the conflict of interest is. I have been talking with drivers from different companies and this practice seems to be isolated to a few. However, I am not sure if the higher management knows or just overlooks the problem. One thing for sure though, all that have responded thinks it is a conflict of interest as I do.

Steady

kwexpress · Jul 21, 2005

KW Express
o/o till i die

Well now this is an interesting topic.

I agree with the one who stated employees should not be able to benefit more than a contractor.

But I think they should make there dispatchers contrators also.
let them work from home.Do away with all the expence just tell everyone sink or swim.

I know lea is on the right track.And as far as owner/ops go
we should be able to look for our own freight and we should all have
a user id and password set up to spot bid nlm and if we find a load that we want we should be able to tell them heres your 15% im loading to blah blah blah

You know I think P2 lets its owner ops find there freight if they want so I think you guys are on equal grounds with there dispatchers that own trucks.Why dont you just start doing it?

davekc · Jul 21, 2005

You know I think P2 lets its owner ops find there freight if they want so I think you guys are on equal grounds with there dispatchers that own trucks.Why dont you just start doing it?

That is pretty much how I look at it. There are other folks within Panther that own trucks but are not in dispatch. It is no secret that I use other sources for freight other than Panther. In those cases, we both benefit. In other cases, we recieve loads that I can't get at their rates or don't know the customer. Again, everybody wins. If they are not active in dispatching, I don't think it matters much unless it is a small carrier.
With regards to the 800 plus unit companies, someone with even 30 or 40 trucks would have little impact. Even with every single one running at a given point, it would equal a very small percent.
Five percent or less.

Davekc
owner
21 years

TJ959 · Jul 25, 2005

When I first started in this business, I drove a company owned truck for a while to see if I liked it. There were rumors at the time that a couple of our dispatchers were either dating or living with a couple of our drivers. Those drivers were always loaded no mater how busy we were. Go figure.

terryandrene · Jul 25, 2005

To me, the phrase "conflict of interest" implies some form of illegal, or certainly immoral, activity. I think it would only apply if there was an injured party. For this to apply to our form of trucking, there should have to be an implied or expressed agreement that all independent contractors are treated equally, without regard for any relationship between a truck owner and the management or employees of a carrier. If there is no declaration by the carrier of equal treatment, there can be no conflict of interest.

For example: It is well known by all, that Landstar utilizes independent brokers that may own several trucks. The owner/operators that are leased on to LEA develop relationships with these brokers to obtain their freight. They do so knowing that the broker will dispatch it's own trucks before calling the O/O's. There is no conflict of interest here because all parties are aware of, and agree to the terms of, this carrier/broker/owner-operator relationship.

On the other hand, FedEx Custom Critical has a perceived policy that neither management, nor employee may own or have an ownership interest in a contracted vehicle. We owner/operators leased to FedEx Custom Critical have a right to expect to be dispatched in the manner determined by our lease agreement or by published policy. Any employee who surrepticiously owned a truck leased to this carrier would be a conflict.

davekc · Jul 25, 2005

Terry is right with regards to the language in your contract.
It depends on whether it is addressed or not. Some contracts have very specific clauses with regards to employees owning equipment. Many of them do not. When signing on, ask for a copy of their contract and see if it is addressed. If not, then figure it could be a possibility that people within a organization could own equipment. Most recruiters should be able to answer these questions along with a copy of a contract to review. Remember that a implied policy is much different than specific information in your contract.
That way you are educated prior to signing on with anyone and you are not surprised.

Davekc
owner
21 years

Steady Eddie · Jul 30, 2005

>Terry is right with regards to the language in your
>contract.
> Most recruiters should be
>able to answer these questions along with a copy of a
>contract to review.
>
>Davekc
>owner
>21 years

Have we heard from any reruiters ? I would like to hear what they think.

Steady

cleat · Aug 2, 2005

Steady,

Seems recuriters want no part of this topic....wonder why?

Cleat

SHADY · Aug 2, 2005

I experanced this conflect while at P2, and after reading these postings feel most of you have little understanding of what is involved. It is not just who gets the next trip, it is who stays loaded with the best trips. Having worked as a dispacher,in a different branch of the transportation industry, I've seen drivers do 4 times what the average was making. One dispatcher was making an extra $100,000 a year. If you can imagine an abuse, it is occuring every day. Why do you think some of the biggest fleet owners are insiders.

CONFIICT to come into collision; clash or be in opposition or at
variance.
INTEREST the relation of being affected by something in respect of abvantage or detriment. Regard for one's own advantage or profit; self interest; rival interests.
This plays out every day at every company that allows this reprehensible practice. Further, it occures when company trucks compeat with owner operators. Just start watching, you will see it.

X1_SRH · Aug 2, 2005

Steady,
Seems recuriters want no part of this topic....wonder why?

I'm your huckleberry. I'll go there.
I cannot speak for any other company except Express-1, but I can tell you that there are no Employee owned trucks in our fleet - Period. I put my reputation on the line every day for this company, and I will not compromise it on these forums or anywhere else. I have nothing to hide. This is not an open invitation to those of you who love to argue on these fora, but if you feel the need to dig further please call me at 866-857-4546. My name is Scott Hancock and I am here from 8-5 EDT M-F. This is a company that does not leave our morals at the breakfast table. Real opportunity on a FAIR playing field.

Sincerely - Scott