I hit a dog today

[diesel96]

One day, I ran over a cat on a residential street while being followed by a cop. I stopped to inspect the carcus as did the cop. The feline vic had an address on it's collar and the cop suggested that I bring it to the owner and offer restitution or write me up for speeding....We went to the owner's home with dead cat in hand. An attractive lady open her door only to see her mangled feline. I didn't know what to say except "I'm sorry and offer her a $50 bill to bury and or purchase a new companion. She accepted...You wouldn't believe what happened next...The cop arrested the lady cat owner......I suddenly protested to the LEO, "what are you arresting her for ? The cop snap back at me, "I'm arresting her for selling her pusillanimous"...

 

[Bubblehead]

Most divisions or Districts have a person with the job title of "Safety Manager" who is usually in charge of determining which accidents are "avoidable" and how they should be handled.

The more "avoidable" accidents there are, the more paperwork there is for this person to shuffle. He/she can keep busy by writing reports, taking pictures, and holding conference calls and meetings with lots of important people.

If there arent any avoidable accidents....then that supply of reports and pictures dries up, and this person doesnt get to have any meetings or make any conference calls. Pretty soon, all those important people will start to wonder why the hell they are paying this person $75K per year just to take up space in an office.

RULE #1 for any bureaucracy or corporate entity is to perpetuate its own existence. If your job as a management person is to solve problems then you had better make damn sure you have a never-ending supply of problems to solve, or you will manage yourself right out of a job.

So the trick here is to solve just enough problems to make yourself look successful...while at the same time inventing enough problems to make yourself look indespensible. Charging drivers with "avoidable" accidents for hitting dogs on a public road is a perfect example of the "job justification through paperwork generation" mentality that is slowly destroying our company.

That about sums it up.

 

[Calypso]

Hey, I'm so sorry.
I am not a driver, but have worked as a 'driver helper' so I know what pressure drivers are under to be perfect.
I wish you luck.

 

[Bryishre]

I hit a dog. just broke its nail. Saftey manager all he could say was" its a famliy member" And "what if it was a child" I said i never seen a 4 pound child run that fast. Still got charged for it.

 

[iruhnman630]

update: no meeting today.

Instead my center manager is going to wait to hear from the safety committee after their next meeting in 2 weeks. If they say its unavoidable, he may seek to overturn the avoidable ruling.

 

[soberups]

update: no meeting today.

Instead my center manager is going to wait to hear from the safety committee after their next meeting in 2 weeks. If they say its unavoidable, he may seek to overturn the avoidable ruling.

Its pretty much irrelevant either way. The fact of the matter is that you are not contractually entitled to a safe driving award, and the company no longer gives them out anyway. And there is no way that any sort of disciplinary action for "avoidable accidents" will be upheld if one or more of them involve hitting a loose dog on a public road when you are obeying the speed limit. The very idea that you would even be "charged" for such an incident in the first place is so ridiculous that there is really no point in you giving a damn one way or the other.

I'm sorry that you hit the dog. Been there, done that, it really sucks. It wasnt your fault. I'm even more sorry that your pea-brained management team is making an already painful situation even worse for you with their empty, meaningless threats.

 

[over9five]

update: no meeting today.

Instead my center manager is going to wait to hear from the safety committee after their next meeting in 2 weeks. If they say its unavoidable, he may seek to overturn the avoidable ruling.

Is that the safety committee that is made up of his little pets? Good luck with that...

 

[scratch]

Is that the safety committee that is made up of his little pets? Good luck with that...

I call these meetings "Kangaroo Courts". The driver's fate has already been decided beforehand. No matter what the circumstances were, its going to be his fault. These things are a joke, a complete waste of time. My Division Manager hinted at me that she wants me to join the Safety Committee, but I refused. And I told her why.

 

[Old International]

The real question is this: Would you rather hit the dog, or swerve wildly, risking the chance of losing control of the PC, and doing some real damage? I made my mind up long ago that unless it was a human, I would not swerve or slam on the brakes. The dog needs to be on a leash, and out of the roadway.

 

[Catatonic]

I call these meetings "Kangaroo Courts". The driver's fate has already been decided beforehand. No matter what the circumstances were, its going to be his fault. These things are a joke, a complete waste of time. My Division Manager hinted at me that she wants me to join the Safety Committee, but I refused. And I told her why.

Geez scratch, there goes your chance at being driver of the month again!
Now you'll be parking out there in the boonies with us our slobs.

 

[iruhnman630]

Is that the safety committee that is made up of his little pets? Good luck with that...

The other drivers, including those on the committee, are quite peeved over the ruling on this one.

I'm feeling a little more confident in the ruling being overturned.

 

[soberups]

The other drivers, including those on the committee, are quite peeved over the ruling on this one.

I'm feeling a little more confident in the ruling being overturned.

I find it appalling and offensive that a so-called "safety committee" of brown-nosing management wannabes would sit and have a meeting and presume to judge whether or not hitting the dog was "avoidable" or whether or not you should be "charged".

You were there. They werent.

Lets talk about what you didnt do that day. You didnt swerve to avoid the dog and hit an oncoming car. You didnt run over a child. You didnt wrap the car around a telephone pole, or put it in the ditch. You didnt break the speed limit.

You were doing your job and a tragedy occured. You had to deal with the trauma and the pain of what occured thru no fault of your own.

The company should be supporting you and commending you for handling a difficult situation in the manner you did. Instead, they are second-guessing you, making subtle threats against your job, and passing judgement on your actions in an ignorant and demeaning fashion.

If I were in your shoes...I would not even dignify the actions of the "safety committee" or your management team by placing any importance in their "findings". Their opinions mean nothing. You know it wasnt your fault...any one with any common sense knows it wasnt your fault..... and there is no possibility of any disciplinary action being upheld against you. So there is absolutely no reason at all for you to even give a damn what they think.

 

[dilligaf]

The real question is this: Would you rather hit the dog, or swerve wildly, risking the chance of losing control of the PC, and doing some real damage? I made my mind up long ago that unless it was a human, I would not swerve or slam on the brakes. The dog needs to be on a leash, and out of the roadway.

I have been driving trucks for a very long time. Local and long haul, single units and combo's. One of the first things I learned when I started driving was, NEVER EVER swerve to avoid hitting an animal for exactly the reason that you stated. You risk losing control of the vehicle, especially a tractor/trailer, but the risk is there for a single unit vehicle as well. Even when it comes to hitting a car. If you run off the road to avoid hitting a car and there is no evidence of another car being present or causing the accident, guess what? You just got charged with failure to maintain control.


I know, no need to say it. It's a sticky situation. Just sayin.................

 

[dilligaf]

How about rescuing the dog and not worrying about the sup.

 

[Matthew]

LMFAO!

 

[Theichii]

i remember the one time i hit a dog, it was late and on a highway. Called my center manager and he said did anyone see you and where is the dog. I told him no and it's in the ditch after it crawled away and died. He asked me if i was okay to continue and then said i think we will be alright because no one saw.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

Is being charged with an avoidable accident a disciplinary meeting? I was told it was not, so there was no steward in meeting.

I had an "avoidable" last week and had a sit down with two sups, CHSP driver, and center manager. Hit while parked /backed into, this after speaking with the person who hit me and I wasn't even in the vehicle. Parked safely on right side of road, hazards on, wheels slightly off road. Didn't know the area well so I asked him where the apartment in question was. He said one of two buildings so I was on my way so I thought.

It was deemed avoidable because I didn't back first, turnaround and block in the vehicle. However I didn't back first because it was presumably a dead-end, with lots of parked cars in the spaces ahead. The guy I talked to in passing was leaving and I was going to do a drivers side back in the space he was taking instead of getting caught in a less optimal back/turnaround unknown mess further up.

There was no liability on my part, the guy just backed right up and hit my vehicle and admitted to it. I wasn't even aware of what happened making the delivery until I jumped in the truck, did my back, and was msging ctr about a NDA. The guy drove back to the scene and admitted to it.

Is this a discipline measure (avoidable, unavoidable) and should it be grieved?

 

[tieguy]

I call these meetings "Kangaroo Courts". The driver's fate has already been decided beforehand. No matter what the circumstances were, its going to be his fault. These things are a joke, a complete waste of time. My Division Manager hinted at me that she wants me to join the Safety Committee, but I refused. And I told her why.

the credibility of the process is critical. the difference between fault and avoidability still confuses some people.

We generally have accidents charged avoidable on a 2 to 1 ratio.

the one thing about joining the safety process would be that you get more insight into the details and you get a chance to impact the decisoion with your insight.
unfortunately our people dont always do a good job of acceptiing blame and will spin the details. Joining the process gives you the details and not the biased commentary of those involved.

I had a shop steward in a safety meeting arguing for a driver who pulled a trailer off the door and pulled an unloader out onto the concrete. I was fine with his arguements until he used the word allegedly to describe the unloaders injuries. At that point I had to remind him that as a member of the safety committee it was also his responsibility to represent the interests of the unloader as well as the driver.

I make that point because the crebility of the process requires that both management and the union evaluate the event outside their normal roles. Doing so objectively you do find that while there are exceptions there often are things our driver could have reasonably done to avoid that accident. Our job as part of the process is to find out what we can do to avoid the accident and then train our workgroup to do so.

 

[soberups]

.... the crebility of the process requires that both management and the union evaluate the event outside their normal roles. Doing so objectively you do find that while there are exceptions there often are things our driver could have reasonably done to avoid that accident. Our job as part of the process is to find out what we can do to avoid the accident and then train our workgroup to do so.

To an extent, I agree. As drivers we must be held to a higher standard and we must continually strive to avoid accidents.

The problem is this. As a management person with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight and from behind the safety and comfort of a desk, you will always be able to second-guess any action that I did or do not take and you will always be able to fabricate a reason why a particular accident may have been theoretically "avoidable" on my part.

You speak of the "credibility" of the process. The process has no credibility when we "charge" a driver with an "avoidable" accident for hitting a dog running loose on a public road. The process has no credibility when we "charge" a driver with an "avoidable" accident when he is legally parked and away from the vehicle and another motorist hits the package car. The process has no credibility when we "charge" a driver with an "avoidable" accident for scratching a package car in the AM when the decision has been made to park the cars so close as to be touching one another due to building overcrowding.

You have every right to place high expectations upon us. But you do not have the right to expect us to take those expectations seriously when they are ridiculous, arbitrary, and totally divorced from reality.

The reality of the current system....is that those who are charged with determining the "avoidabliity" of a given accident are often less concerned with finding the truth and more concerned with simply generating paperwork in order to justify and perpetuate their own jobs.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

the credibility of the process is critical. the difference between fault and avoidability still confuses some people.

We generally have accidents charged avoidable on a 2 to 1 ratio.

the one thing about joining the safety process would be that you get more insight into the details and you get a chance to impact the decisoion with your insight.
unfortunately our people dont always do a good job of acceptiing blame and will spin the details. Joining the process gives you the details and not the biased commentary of those involved.

I had a shop steward in a safety meeting arguing for a driver who pulled a trailer off the door and pulled an unloader out onto the concrete. I was fine with his arguements until he used the word allegedly to describe the unloaders injuries. At that point I had to remind him that as a member of the safety committee it was also his responsibility to represent the interests of the unloader as well as the driver.

I make that point because the crebility of the process requires that both management and the union evaluate the event outside their normal roles. Doing so objectively you do find that while there are exceptions there often are things our driver could have reasonably done to that accident. Our job as part of the process is to find out what we can do to avoid the accident and then train our workgroup to do so.

My question is: if my accident was an avoidable (despite not being in the truck, parked legally, hazards on, and other party well aware of where I was parked).....then can you not say if I HAD backed first and avoided the guy who randomly backed into me parked, I might have instead run over a child chasing a ball or hit a dog by chance? Maybe, I AVOIDED a worse accident by the companies logic, instead of had an avoidable accident? This seems like a deeply twisted way of holding someone accountable for something they had no control over to me.